Posted on 05/22/2015 4:54:44 PM PDT by OK Sun
I have been taught Dispensationalism from my mother’s womb. I was born in a dispensational environment. It was assumed at my church to be a part of the Gospel. There was never another option presented. It made sense. It helped me put together the Scriptures in a way that cleared up so much confusion. And, to be honest, the emphasis on the coming tribulation, current events that prove the Bible’s prophecy, the fear that the Antichrist may be alive today (who is he?) was all quite exciting. But what might be the biggest attraction for me is the charts! Oh how I love charts. I think in charts. And dispensationalism is a theology of charts!
The first time I came across someone who was not a Dispensationalist was in 1999. I am not kidding. It was the first time! I don’t think I even knew if there was another view. It was when I was a student at Dallas Theological Seminary (the bastion of Dispensationalism) and I was swimming with some guys who were at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Once they discovered I was a dispensationalist, they giggled and snickered. They made fun of the rapture, the sacrificial system during the millennium, and the mark of the beast (which, at that time, was some type of barcode). It was as if they patted me on the head and said “It’s okay . . . nice little dispensationalist.” I was so angry. I was humiliated. I was a second-rate theologian. They were “Covenantalists” (whatever that was). But they were the cool guys who believed in the historic Christian faith and I was the cultural Christian, believing in novel ideas.
(Excerpt) Read more at reclaimingthemind.org ...
You keep on putting up a strawman!
Neither he nor I deny his association with that Jewabie nut group.
He left them with severe disagreements over their insistence in sticking with Pharisee error.
Wanting to be a Jew seems to be a biggie for lots of people.
The idea that Yeshua’s way was tangled in Judaism is a form of insanity. He denounced every shred of the Pharisee’s false law. Its all written in plain words in Matthew 23, issuing ‘woes’ for every part of the backbone of their system.
This is why Paul insisted that a man’s head was not to be covered. Its more than a hat, its a total man made system.
.
And right after he said that, the Jews all rejoiced, knowing that Jews and Gentiles were now one body, blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ. And that the covenants God made with Abraham and David weren't really all that important after all.
And they all lived happily ever after. The End.
What is our great commission? Do you know it and where to find it?
And BTW: what about those 12 thrones and Paul? Does he need to bring a stool to sit on in the Kingdom?
Whooooops! Say what? Who has ever said that? Certainly not anyone I have seen.
>>It seems someone did a whole lot of "theologizing" to omit water baptism and repentance from the conversion of a believer.<<
What???? Where are you coming up with these? The preaching of the Kingdom does NOT mean going back under the Old Covenant.
The Jews (along with them the 12) were still of the mindset that Jesus would return forthwith to set up His earthly Kingdom. Study the actions and words of Peter. He was still concerned with eating with Gentiles, eating no unclean food etc. Remember that Christ had told them NOT to go to the Gentiles but that He had come to the lost sheep of Israel. It was NOT until after He had ascended and the Jews as a whole still rejected Him as their Messiah that Paul was sent.
I'm having a difficult time understanding why you don't see the difference.
IIRC some of the epistles written by Apostles came Before 70 AD and some after. Once Titus destroyed Jerusalem the surviving Christians had fled the Romans and this insured that the surviving Apostles went into ‘all the world’ with message. Until the Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem the Apostles were huddled there. Paul was out on mission trips.
Stop with the Bullinger already. I DON'T CARE what he thought, said, or did. It's immaterial to the conversation. He wasn't one of the apostles and thereby not part of this discussion.
>>No one answered if the Jewish believers on Pentecost were saved by grace? Yes or no will do.<<
Of course they were with their eye on the physical establishement of the earthly Kingdom of Christ. NO ONE until Paul divided the "church" from the nation of Israel.
Where did smvoice ever say there were two different ways of salvation? I have never seen her say that nor do I think she believes that.
Oh please. Your quote.
>>Michael Rood has no connection whatsoever with The Way International<<
Those who are saved, from the beginning of this earth, are saved by grace through faith. There are not different times and ways in which people are saved. This is where I most strongly disagree with the Dispensationalists-that people were saved in various modes in each dispensation.
The gospel of the grace of God: what is given to do in order that a person is declared righteous before God?
Did Abraham have to believe that Christ died for his sins, was buried and rose again the third day to be declared righteous before God? What about Moses? Or David? Or John the Baptist? Or Matt. Mark Luke John, the little flock of believers, or the hearers of Peter's Pentecost sermon? Were they told what was given by God to do in order to be declared righteous before Him? Where were they told this?
And finally, what about us, now, in this age of the grace of God. Are we told what to do in order to be declared righteous before God? Where are we told this?
Faith is ALWAYS counted for righteousness. Always has been, always will be. But faith in WHAT? Did God demand the same faith from David that He demanded from Abraham? IF he did, then David had a son that God required to be sacrificed. And on and on. Faith will do what God tells you He is requiring of you. And it's always counted for our righteousness, both BEFORE the Cross, although they did not know that their displays of faith all pointed to Christ, and AFTER the Cross. The believers of Israel ALL did was God demanded of them. In order to enter the Kingdom, not the body of Christ. I'm sorry you just cannot see, red.
NO ONE that I know of thinks there are different ways of being saved in different dispensations. It has always been by faith and always will be by faith. That doesn't change the fact that God has managed the affairs (dispensations) of people at different times.
redleghunter, I cannot help you. That is obvious. You seem unable to even see how important the point is that Peter and the 11 were promised by Christ that they would sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel when He returns and sets up His kingdom, while Paul was promised nothing of the sort, although YOU claim they all had the same message. It should strike you as odd that this is so. And should send you on a journey through God’s word, if for no other reason than to try to prove me wrong. But you’re ignoring the elephants I’m placing in the room and focusing on the dust bunnies in the corner. This is how I began to understand dispensationalism: by trying to prove someone wrong, I studied and I studied and I found out that I had been wrong, not that person. And I thank God daily for it. I will not be blown around by every wind of doctrine that comes along and I can show you Scripture by Scripture why that is so. I don’t have to make pretzels out of Scriptures in order to “try” to make them fit together and make sense. Example: “Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.” Was baptism required for the remission sins?
I’m amazed that people equate different dispensations with different requirements for salvation.
The good seed snatched away by the birds of the air ...
There are only TWO choices??
If it's an EXAMPLE; can you explain it to me?
Correct, he has no connection whatsoever.
But his lack of discernment had him connected to them for his establishment. wriggle some more, es.
Not lack of discernment, lack of honesty on the part of the Jewabies.
His discernment is exactly what got the fireworks started.
.
If he could have he would have.
What a great explanation to a question I've often wondered about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.