Christian Liberty Forced me to Leave Dispensationalism

[PinSeeker]

I usually run from these discussions because they can get out of hand, and they become knock out swing out fights..

Hopefully not on your part. <smile> But to my previous points, why do they become "knock out swing out fights"? That's a rhetorical question, in case you were not sure... <smile>

I have been called calvinist because I believe in eternal security
I have been called an arminian because I believe in free will

Psssst. Calvinists believe in free will, too. Arminians are not able to see ~ particularly in Romans 9 ~ that the issue is the heart, the natural human condition as a consequence of the Fall ~ not the will. Hopefully you're a Calvinist and just don't want to say it out loud... or don't realize it. <smile>

so lets just look at the word..not at what a person might believe.. because even in this, (I will use premil as an example) there are alot of beliefs in this view. and not all of them even agree, so why would I want to put a label on this person. Just sit and look at the word...

I don't mind labels... if they fit. The problem is that people create false labels ~ or at least apply misperceived attributes to those labels ~ and that translates to something along the lines of strawman arguments and/or demagoguery. For example, saying Calvinists "deny free will."

He did not deal with man the same before the fall and after the fall.

Hmmm... well, in a certain sense I agree, but in a different sense I do not... Before the fall, didn't God tell Adam (in Genesis 2:17) that if he partook of the tree in the midst of Eden, that he would, in the very day he did so, surely die? In that sense, the only difference is that God set out to redeem His creation, to make all things new again, which was not necessary until the Fall took place. His requirement ~ for man to be perfect/holy as He is perfect/holy was, is, and always will be the same. And to reference the prophet Micah, what God requires of us ~ to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with our God ~ has never and will never change.

What did he do between the fall and the flood... is this different than immediately after the flood until Abraham?

What happened with Abraham, and who was blessed by him?

How about the one nation God called out. did he do things the same with them, or did he do things different?

This is basically all Dispensationaism tries to differentiate in an easy way. to help people understand these different times

I don't really understand what you're getting at with these questions or the final statement.

Well as a dispensationalist all my life all over the country, I have never heard any of these arguments.

They would never characterize it as a "series of Plan Bs." But that's the unavoidable implication.

Again, I have heard people ( even in this chatroom) say the Israel and those under that age were saved by obeying the law.

and during the final week of this age (the 70th week) they will return to being saved by this legal system.

Yeah. Ugh. <smile>

Cool. Thanks. Grace and peace to you.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Again, I have seen people take this innocent idea and make it something that is divisive (like those who say people are saved different in each dispensation) But in generality. its helps more than it divides.

Well everyone is ultimately saved because of the blood that Jesus shed at Calvary. Every one is saved by grace through faith. with that being said, the object of peoples faith was different in every dispensation as direcrted by God.

Example- in order for people to be saved in the dispensation of conscience, they had to get on the boat!

 

[PinSeeker]

Arthur81 said: The Jewish theocracy was ended 1st C: Mt. 21:43-45; Lk 20:16-18; Jn 4:21-23​

Eternally Grateful said: and?? This does not mean God no longer will keep his promise to them​

Uh-oh. <smile>

Arthur81 said: There is only one people of God, not two: Gal. 3:7-9; Rm. 2:28-29, 10:12-13; 1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 2:15-16; Phil. 3:3; Col. 3:11​

Eternally Grateful said: As for as salvation goes. there has always been one people. not two. But a special people God called out for a special purpose. there is only one of them. and all the rest (The OT calls them nations or gentiles)​

Uh-oh. <smile>

Arthur81 said: The church is Israel continued: Heb. 12:18-24; 1 Pet. 2:9-10; Gal. 6:15-16(RSV, NEB, REB)​

Eternally Grateful said: No it is not.​

Ah. This is the real crux of the problem... who God's Isreal really is... who true Jews of God are. Paul says it well in Romans 2:28-29... and then finally Romans 11:25-26. Respectively:

"For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God"​

​

"...a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved..."​

To the rest of your most recent post, the land promise had both immediate and eternal implications. The immediate fulfillment ~ to the ancient Israelites ~ was that little strip of land on the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea. But this was indicative of the true eternal fulfillment when Jesus returns, when, as He says in Matthew 5:5, "the meek shall inherit the earth."

Eternally Grateful said: God did not make the same promise to the church he made to Israel.​

He did. He just made it in a lesser way, so to speak, to the Israelites of old. The promises of the Old Testament point to and indicate the true ~ greater ~ nature and certainty of the eternal promises.

Eternally Grateful said: they are separate entities. but people from both are called Gods children and are part of the church of God​

Well, again, I would point out Hebrews 1:1-2...

"Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, Whom He appointed the heir of all things, through Whom also He created the world."

Eternally Grateful said: if you do not differentiate these prophecies. you risk getting confused and making God out to be a liar who can not keep his promises​

That's not really the issue, EG. The issue is not "not differentiating," but differentiating them... a bit differently... <smile> One of the great themes of the Bible is that the lesser points to and speaks to the certainty of the greater.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Arthur81 said: There is only one people of God, not two: Gal. 3:7-9; Rm. 2:28-29, 10:12-13; 1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 2:15-16; Phil. 3:3; Col. 3:11

In this age yes- it is called teh church. but the tewo people of God fact is for the millennial kingdom. The church is the bride of Christ and Israel is the wife of Jehovah. We co reign with Jesus from Heaven while Israel rules on earth. This is amply spelled out in the OT.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Hopefully not on your part. <smile> But to my previous points, why do they become "knock out swing out fights"? That's a rhetorical question, in case you were not sure... <smile>

Like I said, I may be

Psssst. Calvinists believe in free will, too. Arminians are not able to see ~ particularly in Romans 9 ~ that the issue is the heart, the natural human condition as a consequence of the Fall ~ not the will. Hopefully you're a Calvinist and just don't want to say it out loud... or don't realize it. <smile>

I reject calvinism and Arminianism

I don't mind labels... if they fit. The problem is that people create false labels ~ or at least apply misperceived attributes to those labels ~ and that translates to something along the lines of strawman arguments and/or demagoguery. For example, saying Calvinists "deny free will."

Thats why I say let’s discuss the word. not calvinism

Hmmm... well, in a certain sense I agree, but in a different sense I do not... Before the fall, didn't God tell Adam (in Genesis 2:17) that if he partook of the tree in the midst of Eden, that he would, in the very day he did so, surely die? In that sense, the only difference is that God set out to redeem His creation, to make all things new again, which was not necessary until the Fall took place. His requirement ~ for man to be perfect/holy as He is perfect/holy was, is, and always will be the same. And to reference the prophet Micah, what God requires of us ~ to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with our God ~ has never and will never change.

once again, as far as salvation, I agree

But things were not the same in every dispensation.

I don't really understand what you're getting at with these questions or the final statement.

Have you ever actully studied dispensational thinking and all the divisions of time? It would take awhile to explain in greater detail

They would never characterize it as a "series of Plan Bs." But that's the unavoidable implication.

says who? Again, I have never heard it..

Yeah. Ugh. <smile>

Cool. Thanks. Grace and peace to you.

Thank you

 

[PinSeeker]

In this age yes- it is called teh church. but the tewo people of God fact is for the millennial kingdom.

Very much disagree.

The church is the bride of Christ...

Sure.

Israel is the wife of Jehovah.

Disagree; Israel is the household of God.

We co reign with Jesus from Heaven while Israel rules on earth.

Very much disagree.

This is amply spelled out in the OT.

Appreciate your thoughts.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

I reject Calvinism and Arminianism

And subscribe to what? I think you just "reject" the labels... and probably fall at least pretty much into the latter. Most western Christians do. The fact that you suppose(d) Calvinists "don't believe in free will" says volumes. Here are Jacobus Arminius's five "objections"...

1. Free Will. Man is a sinner who has the free will to either cooperate with God’s Spirit and be regenerated, or resist God’s grace and perish.​

2. Conditional Election. God’s election is based upon His foreknowledge. He chooses everyone whom He knew would, of their own free will, respond to the gospel and choose Christ.​

3. Universal Atonement. When Christ died on the cross, He shed His blood for everyone. He paid a provisional price for all but guaranteed it for none.​

4. Resistible Grace. Saving grace can be resisted because God won’t overrule man’s free will. Man is born again when he believes and receives God’s grace.​

5. Falling From Grace. Those who are truly saved can lose their salvation by falling away from the faith.​

Forget Arminius and Arminianism for a moment. Are you on board with any or all of those five points? If not, which ones are you and are you not, and why?

Thats why I say let’s discuss the word. not calvinism

Well, okay, but I say if we discuss Calvinism, we are discussing the Word. But sure, let's discuss the Word. :)

...things were not the same in every dispensation.

I mean, circumstances change over time, for sure, but not God. You'd have to give some example of how you think "things" were different between "dispensations."

Have you ever actully studied dispensational thinking and all the divisions of time?

Yes. <smile>

It would take awhile to explain in greater detail

I don't think you have to go into great detail. I think in a couple of paragraphs ~ maybe ~ you could give an example or two, at least in general terms. And then we might take a deeper dive if warranted, but yeah, not a big ask.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

And subscribe to what? I think you just "reject" the labels... and probably fall at least pretty much into the latter. Most western Christians do. The fact that you suppose(d) Calvinists "don't believe in free will" says volumes. Here are Jacobus Arminius's five "objections"...

I will just say this. You say Calvinists do not reject free will. Yet as I shared, people call me Armenian because I believe we have free will. It is those "Calvinists" who do this.
Now, if it is all these mainstream Calvinists that are attacking me as being Armenian, even through my denials of having anything to do with Armenian doctrine. because I believe the lost have the freedom to say yes or no to God when offered his gift of salvation. then how can you say Calvinists believe in free will. Are they all wrong?
I will just leave it there because this is not a Calvin vs Armenian debate. And like I said, lets not discuss "Isms" and lets just discuss the word. and in this thread. lets get back to dispensationalism

1. Free Will. Man is a sinner who has the free will to either cooperate with God’s Spirit and be regenerated, or resist God’s grace and perish.​

2. Conditional Election. God’s election is based upon His foreknowledge. He chooses everyone whom He knew would, of their own free will, respond to the gospel and choose Christ.​

3. Universal Atonement. When Christ died on the cross, He shed His blood for everyone. He paid a provisional price for all but guaranteed it for none.​

4. Resistible Grace. Saving grace can be resisted because God won’t overrule man’s free will. Man is born again when he believes and receives God’s grace.​

5. Falling From Grace. Those who are truly saved can lose their salvation by falling away from the faith.​

Forget Arminius and Arminianism for a moment. Are you on board with any or all of those five points? If not, which ones are you and are you not, and why?

See above. I will not get into a Calvin VS Armenian debate in this thread. if you would like to open another one. feel free..

Well, okay, but I say if we discuss Calvinism, we are discussing the Word. But sure, let's discuss the Word. :)

Well i disagree with that statement. so lets discuss the word. not an "ism"

I mean, circumstances change over time, for sure, but not God. You'd have to give some example of how you think "things" were different between "dispensations."

Well lets see. are you saying that everythign was the same in the way God dealt with people. and those who administered his plan were the same pre flood and post flood?
How about Post flood to Gods promise to abraham?
How about from Post Abraham, until the giving of the law. and the priesthood?
And how about the time of the law. and the time we are in today. the church?

If you can think of absolutely no differences.. then I would suggest you study a little more.

but remember, this is not a salvic issue. I am not saying the differences is in how people get saved. This is one of the many accusations against dispensational thinking that have been proposed by those who are misled by what we really believe. and another reason I just want to discuss the word.

to be honest. I have not studied the dispensational charts in decades. I just do not feel it is required for my Christian growth. And I have not taught history through the OT in a long time. so have had no need to use it to help others.

About the only issue that continuously crops up is the end times prophecies. and what about the nation of Israel. which are the two I believe sticking points..

and again, with these two points. I would rather discuss what the word says. Not what a dispensational believes. or what an Amill believes, or a preterist or whatever other term people want to put people under in an attempt to divide them into groups. which causes more harm in my view than good. Because them people get defensive when they feel they are being attacked. which in my view. is right where satan wants us.. tyo be fighting

Yes. <smile>


I don't think you have to go into great detail. I think in a couple of paragraphs ~ maybe ~ you could give an example or two, at least in general terms. And then we might take a deeper dive if warranted, but yeah, not a big ask.

Grace and peace to you.

Again, I think just in basic terms. Who was responsible for doing the sacrifices before God created the priesthood?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

In this age yes- it is called teh church. but the tewo people of God fact is for the millennial kingdom. The church is the bride of Christ and Israel is the wife of Jehovah. We co reign with Jesus from Heaven while Israel rules on earth. This is amply spelled out in the OT.

Interesting. I have heard this. but not sure I agree.

All saved people will return with Christ. not just gentiles..

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Very much disagree.

Well then you must be one who believes the enormous amount of prophecy concerning the nation of Israel in the OLD is now for the church.

YOu also do not believe God is going

to make a new covenant with Israel though He said He will.

Jeremiah 31:31-36

King James Version

​

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
35 Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name:
36 If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.

Disagree; Israel is the household of God.

Israel is the divorced wife of Jehovah whom He declared He will remarry.

Very much disagree.

Then you deny Scripture​

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Interesting. I have heard this. but not sure I agree.

All saved people will return with Christ. not just gentiles..

If you ask, I will gladly provide the enormous amount of verses showing Israels supremacy on earth during the Milennial kingdom.

 

[PinSeeker]

Well then you must be one who believes the enormous amount of prophecy concerning the nation of Israel in the OLD is now for the church.

No, I'm not "one of those," Ronald. <smile> But I would say that God's Israel now consists both of believers in Christ of the Old Testament and believers in Christ now ~ all who were and are (and will be by the time Christ returns) truly in Christ make up God's true Israel, the household of God. We will all, in the words of Psalm 23, "dwell in the House of the Lord forever." There is no "replacement," if that's what you're getting at, Ronald, but rather inclusion. God is still, as yet, building His Israel. <smile>

You also do not believe God is going to make a new covenant with Israel though He said He will.

No, I do not "not believe" that, Ronald. <smile> And... He already has... and we have seen the fulfillment of that covenant... in His full glory; we have beheld Him. <smile>

As I said, the issue is really who Isreal ~ the Israel of God ~ really is. Which Paul makes clear in Romans 2:28-29... and ultimately in Romans 11:25-26.

Israel is the divorced wife of Jehovah whom He declared He will remarry.

There will be no "re-marriage." God has not divorced anyone or anything. God hates divorce, remember? He says so through the prophet Malachi (Malachi 2:16). So there has certainly been no divorce, but because there has been no Wedding (capital 'W')... yet... <smile> ...but there certainly will be. Think of it as still yet a betrothal, an engagement; we, Israel... <smile> ...are betrothed, or engaged to be the Lord's ~ we are His Bride in waiting for our beloved (Song of Solomon 8). But yes, as of yet, we are betrothed to be the Lord's (2 Corinthians 11:2).

But there has been unfaithfulness... not on God's part of course, but Israel's...

But certainly, there will be a wedding and the wedding feast of the Lamb (Revelation 19, 21). One day, the Church ~ all of Israel (Romans 11:26), which consists of all those in Christ since the Fall ~ will be presented to Jesus as His bride, and everyone who believes in Him will feast together at the supper of the Lamb in heaven (Revelation 19:7-9). We will be wearing white, dressed beautifully for our Husband (Revelation 21:2). I ~ hopefully we all ~ look forward to it with great eagerness and anticipation. <smile>

Then you deny Scripture

No, absolutely not... <smile>

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

If you ask, I will gladly provide the enormous amount of verses showing Israels supremacy on earth during the Milennial kingdom.

They (the living) will be in their land, And jesus will be there also.

But I have no idea what this has to do with the ressurected saints, of which will be both Israel and Gentile believers..

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No, I'm not "one of those," Ronald. <smile> But I would say that God's Israel now consists both of believers in Christ of the Old Testament and believers in Christ now ~ all who were and are (and will be by the time Christ returns) truly in Christ make up God's true Israel, the household of God. We will all, in the words of Psalm 23, "dwell in the House of the Lord forever." There is no "replacement," if that's what you're getting at, Ronald, but rather inclusion. God is still, as yet, building His Israel. <smile>

Sorry but the church was not born until Pentecost. Remember Jesus told Peter He WILL build HIs church, not has been building.

Also, as no one in the OT knew the name Jesus and did not know that they had to trust in the death, resurrection of Jesus for their sin, they are not part of the church

We will all, in the words of Psalm 23, "dwell in the House of the Lord forever." There is no "replacement," if that's what you're getting at, Ronald, but rather inclusion. God is still, as yet, building His Israel. <smile>

Paul in Romans 9-11 made it clear thatr Israel and teh church are 2 separate entities.

No, I do not "not believe" that, Ronald. <smile> And... He already has... and we have seen the fulfillment of that covenant... in His full glory; we have beheld Him. <smile>

As I said, the issue is really who Isreal ~ the Israel of God ~ really is. Which Paul makes clear in Romans 2:28-29... and ultimately in Romans 11:25-26.

If you reject God making a new covenant with the people known as ethnic Israel then please explain this:

Jeremiah 31:31-36

King James Version

​

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
35 Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name:
36 If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.

As I said, the issue is really who Isreal ~ the Israel of God ~ really is. Which Paul makes clear in Romans 2:28-29... and ultimately in Romans 11:25-26.

And if you believe it is the saved out of the nation of Israel , you are correct. If you hold to the covenant theology view that the church isa now the "Israel of God" You are mistaken and have misunderstood Scripture as written.

There will be no "re-marriage." God has not divorced anyone or anything. God hates divorce, remember? He says so through the prophet Malachi (Malachi 2:16). So there has certainly been no divorce, but because there has been no Wedding (capital 'W')... yet... <smile> ...but there certainly will be. Think of it as still yet a betrothal, an engagement; we, Israel... <smile> ...are betrothed, or engaged to be the Lord's ~ we are His Bride in waiting for our beloved (Song of Solomon 8). But yes, as of yet, we are betrothed to be the Lord's (2 Corinthians 11:2).

God married the nation of Israel and gave her a bill of divorcement and will remarry the nation of Israel.

Deuteronomy is written as a suzerain marriage contract.

Jeremiah 3:8-11

New International Version

​

8 I gave faithless Israel her certificate of divorce and sent her away because of all her adulteries. Yet I saw that her unfaithful sister Judah had no fear; she also went out and committed adultery. 9 Because Israel’s immorality mattered so little to her, she defiled the land and committed adultery with stone and wood. 10 In spite of all this, her unfaithful sister Judah did not return to me with all her heart, but only in pretense,” declares the Lord.
11 The Lord said to me, “Faithless Israel is more righteous than unfaithful Judah.

Can't give someone you are not wed to a bill of divorcement.

Ezekiel 16:8-14

King James Version

​

8 Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy time was the time of love; and I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness: yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord God, and thou becamest mine.
9 Then washed I thee with water; yea, I throughly washed away thy blood from thee, and I anointed thee with oil.
10 I clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod thee with badgers' skin, and I girded thee about with fine linen, and I covered thee with silk.
11 I decked thee also with ornaments, and I put bracelets upon thy hands, and a chain on thy neck.
12 And I put a jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head.
13 Thus wast thou decked with gold and silver; and thy raiment was of fine linen, and silk, and broidered work; thou didst eat fine flour, and honey, and oil: and thou wast exceeding beautiful, and thou didst prosper into a kingdom.
14 And thy renown went forth among the heathen for thy beauty: for it was perfect through my comeliness, which I had put upon thee, saith the Lord God.

a little study will show this was the act of marrying Israel.

But certainly, there will be a wedding and the wedding feast of the Lamb (Revelation 19, 21). One day, the Church ~ all of Israel (Romans 11:26), which consists of all those in Christ since the Fall ~ will be presented to Jesus as His bride, and everyone who believes in Him will feast together at the supper of the Lamb in heaven (Revelation 19:7-9). We will be wearing white, dressed beautifully for our Husband (Revelation 21:2). I ~ hopefully we all ~ look forward to it with great eagerness and anticipation. <smile>

The church is espoused to Jesus yes, Israel was married and divorced as SCripture says.

No, absolutely not... <smile>

If you reject the verses I showed you, you do.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

They (the living) will be in their land, And jesus will be there also.

But I have no idea what this has to do with the ressurected saints, of which will be both Israel and Gentile believers..

The church will already be in heaven vis the rapture. Israel and the tribulation saints are resurrected in the first resurrection as declared in REv. 20. they will be granted entrance into the millennial kingdom.

Teh separating of the sheep and goats in Matthew are for the survivors of the tribulation (people will still be alive when Jesus returns and sets up His throne of glory)

The righteous living go into the kingdom- the unrighteous will not.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Sorry but the church was not born until Pentecost. Remember Jesus told Peter He WILL build HIs church, not has been building.

Also, as no one in the OT knew the name Jesus and did not know that they had to trust in the death, resurrection of Jesus for their sin, they are not part of the church

Total nonsense. You have no idea of what you're talking about.

1 Corinthians 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Did Jesus say to Moses and Elijah at His transfiguration: "Sorry, guys, but you can't be in My church. You just didn't live during the right time period. Tough luck."? No. They belong to Christ every bit as much as we do. He obviously knew them personally. But, they're not in His church? Ridiculous. They are.

Even though those in the church are considered to be the spiritual seed of Abraham, somehow Abraham himself is not part of the church? How does that make any sense?

Galatians 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. 9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham....29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

 

[PinSeeker]

Sorry but the church was not born until Pentecost.

The Apostolic Church began at Pentecost, and today we identify the Church by its fidelity to Apostolic doctrine. But Christ's one holy catholic (universal) Church has always been. As Paul says in Ephesians 2, even to us Gentiles, we "are no longer strangers and aliens, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In Him (we) also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.

One great day, we believers in Christ ~ all of us ~ will all stand in the congregation of the righteous (Psalm 1).

Remember Jesus told Peter He WILL build HIs church, not has been building.

Ah, well, He's telling Peter what He will continue doing. And on what... <smile> ...not who, unless we say on Himself <smile> Paul talks about the temple ~ also church ~ being built on the apostles and the prophets at the end of Ephesians 2...

Also, as no one in the OT knew the name Jesus and did not know that they had to trust in the death, resurrection of Jesus for their sin, they are not part of the church

Jesus was portrayed in types and shadows all through the Old Testament... Moses and the Prophets. If you don't "see" Jesus all though the Old Testament, you're not reading it right... or... well, <smile>... but it's no laughing matter.

Paul in Romans 9-11 made it clear that Israel and the church are 2 separate entities.

Nope. One and the same. Just the one quote that "not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel" (Romans 9:6) should be more than sufficient to understand that. And a second of course, "a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:25-25)

If you reject God making a new covenant with the people known as ethnic Israel then please explain this:

Jeremiah 31:31-36​

In those days, Israel did consist of mostly ~ but not all ~ ethnic Jews. There were foreigners/aliens in the commonwealth of Isreal then, which foreshadowed the grafting in of Gentile believers. The better way to say it is something like this:

The coming New Covenant was prophesied to "lesser" Israel, the Israel of the Old Testament, lesser in the sense that it was limited to mainly (but not totally, as I said) ethnic Jewish believers and a foreshadowing of the "greater" Israel to come... which would begin to become a reality when Jesus came... and greater in the sense that it would be inclusive of believers of all ethnicities, from every tongue, tribe, and nation.

And if you believe it is the saved out of the nation of Israel , you are correct.

I know. <smile>

If you hold to the covenant theology view that the church is now the "Israel of God" You are mistaken and have misunderstood Scripture as written.

Well the New Testament Church is now included in the Israel of God. And I say if you don't understand that to be correct, then you are the one mistaken and misunderstanding of Scripture as written.

God married the nation of Israel and gave her a bill of divorcement and will remarry the nation of Israel.

I'll agree with you only in this sense, that throughout the Old Testament ~ from the marriage of Adam and Eve on, marriage is symbolic of God’s exclusive, absolutely faithful, redeeming relationship to His people. And nowhere more so than in Hosea.

S little study will show this was the act of marrying Israel.

I think not. See above. But God's relationship with His people Israel is likened to the Godly institution of marriage in great ~ really greater ~ and profound ways.

If you reject the verses I showed you, you do.

I get that you think that, but that really means nothing, frankly. other than it's your opinion. I respect it, but that's it. You say a lot of good things on this board, Ronald, and what you're saying here is not "bad," per se, but just... well, taking things too far, I guess... too woodenly, so to speak... not getting the full Godly, spiritual impact and implications of it. And hey, feel free to call that my opinion; I'm perfectly fine with that.

Grace and peace to you, Ronald.

 

[Earburner]

"Christian Liberty" as stated in the Westminster Confession and repeated in the 1689 Baptist Confession, reads:

"God alone is Lord of the conscience, and has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in any thing contrary to his word, or not contained in it."

When I first began discussions with Amillennialists, in trying to defend my Dispensationalist views, I began to notice I was too often trying to refute an Amil's reference to a clear statement of Scripture with my idea of truth; but I began to notice I was not refuting the Amil with Scripture, but with the footnotes in a Dispensationalist study Bible. I was taking the annotations and footnotes of man's word as the truth, rather than God's word.

As a teenager, I noticed that there were no Seven Dispensations stated in the Bible and the reason given to me for them, I saw I could just as easily come up with 3 or 2 or even as many as 9; so, there was no biblical requirement to believe in the Seven. I began to question the footnotes.

The Dispensationalist told me that there was a difference between the "kingdom of God" and the "kingdom of heaven", but that is only in Study Bible footnotes, not in the Scripture. Using a parallel of the gospels or harmony, I saw that Matthew usually used "kingdom of heaven", when Mark and Luke would write "kingdom of God" in the same time and context; and then Jesus used the terms interchangeably:

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'Truly I tell you, it will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.'” (Matt 19:23-24 NRSV)

The conquest of the promised land began about 1450 BC, and scholars believe Joshua was written in the late 7th Century BC. If we use a date of 600 BC and count the time in years up to 1948, we have a little over 2500 years. With that in mind, did the promise to Abraham take more than 2500 years(and still counting) to be accomplished?

"Thus the LORD gave to Israel all the land that he swore to their ancestors that he would give them; and having taken possession of it, they settled there. And the LORD gave them rest on every side just as he had sworn to their ancestors; not one of all their enemies had withstood them, for the LORD had given all their enemies into their hands. Not one of all the good promises that the LORD had made to the house of Israel had failed; all came to pass." (Josh 21:43-45 NRSV) See this repeated in 23:14-16

"I will not drive them out from before you in one year, or the land would become desolate and the wild animals would multiply against you. Little by little I will drive them out from before you, until you have increased and possess the land." (Exod 23:29-30 NRSV)

Trying to stretch that "little by little" up to 2500+ years is ridiculous! Did the word of God state a lie in Josh. 21:43-45 and 23:14-16; or are the footnotes of study Bibles the actual word of God? I began to see my holding to the footnotes in contradiction to what God said, to border on blasphemy. These are just a couple of examples of how God's word itself drove me out of Dispensationalism.

Amen!
1 Cor. 2
[5] That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power [authority] of God.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The church will already be in heaven vis the rapture.

I am sorry brother.

But for me to think God is going to resurrect me, and leave Abraham, David, Daniel, and other great God fearing jews in the grave intol the tribulation is over or some other date I will not and can not buy.

Israel and the tribulation saints are resurrected in the first resurrection as declared in REv. 20. they will be granted entrance into the millennial kingdom.

Actually that would be the tribulation saints, who died during the tribulation. it does not matter if they are Israel or not. The rest of the OT saints will be resurrected when I am, be it at this time, or earlier.

Teh separating of the sheep and goats in Matthew are for the survivors of the tribulation (people will still be alive when Jesus returns and sets up His throne of glory)

The goats are the lost. The sheep are the found..

Jesus shepherds the sheep and he wants us to help shepherd the flock.

The righteous living go into the kingdom- the unrighteous will not.

I think it is better to say the saved (believers) enter the kingdom. the lost (non believer) will not.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The Apostolic Church began at Pentecost, and today we identify the Church by its fidelity to Apostolic doctrine. But Christ's one holy catholic (universal) Church has always been. As Paul says in Ephesians 2, even to us Gentiles, we "are no longer strangers and aliens, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In Him (we) also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.

One great day, we believers in Christ ~ all of us ~ will all stand in the congregation of the righteous (Psalm 1).


Ah, well, He's telling Peter what He will continue doing. And on what... <smile> ...not who, unless we say on Himself <smile> Paul talks about the temple ~ also church ~ being built on the apostles and the prophets at the end of Ephesians 2...


Jesus was portrayed in types and shadows all through the Old Testament... Moses and the Prophets. If you don't "see" Jesus all though the Old Testament, you're not reading it right... or... well, <smile>... but it's no laughing matter.

Agree to here

Nope. One and the same. Just the one quote that "not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel" (Romans 9:6) should be more than sufficient to understand that. And a second of course, "a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:25-25)

Nope. in Romans 11 Paul definitely separates the true

There is us (gentiles, or the unnatural branches)

then their is them: and they are Natural branches, Blinded in part, will be made jealose by the fact God has given what was theirs to the gentiles (his church) and will one day repent, and all be saved.

Paul even warned gentile believers not to boast. but be warned of the mystery, the blindness in part has happened to Israel until the time of the gentile is complete.

Prophecy tells us when that will be, and tells us Israel will nto only repent. but be restored.

In those days, Israel did consist of mostly ~ but not all ~ ethnic Jews. There were foreigners/aliens in the commonwealth of Isreal then, which foreshadowed the grafting in of Gentile believers. The better way to say it is something like this:

The coming New Covenant was prophesied to "lesser" Israel, the Israel of the Old Testament, lesser in the sense that it was limited to mainly (but not totally, as I said) ethnic Jewish believers and a foreshadowing of the "greater" Israel to come... which would begin to become a reality when Jesus came... and greater in the sense that it would be inclusive of believers of all ethnicities, from every tongue, tribe, and nation.

Or we could be like Paul said in Galatians 3 and Romans 4. That the OT prophesied that Gentiles would be saved by faith just like Abraham, who was before the law) was saved. as it says, in you (Abraham's seed) shall all the nations be blessed.

Abraham's seed is Christ. and through him, there is no more Jew or Greek, free or slave, male or female.in fact. it has always been this way as far as the body of Christ goes. Jonah preached to the evil gentile city of nineveh, and they repented and were saved by the same faith Abraham was. And as Jesus said, the people of Nineveh will Judge this generation.

Matthew 12:41

The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a greater than Jonah is here.

I know. <smile>


Well the New Testament Church is now included in the Israel of God. And I say if you don't understand that to be correct, then you are the one mistaken and misunderstanding of Scripture as written.

Gentiles have always been included in the spiritual body of Christ.. See Nineveh in fact. King David's grandmother was a gentile..

It is an error to think as far as eternity goes that there was ever a separation.


God promised Abraham that all nations would be blessed. not just Israel.

Israel was given a plot of land and promised peace. but they were never promised salvation. That was their mistake and the mistake that caused them to crucify Christ. because Christ told them they were wrong.. Sadly paul had to fight this same thinking.