Posted on 10/26/2007 9:00:59 PM PDT by topcat54
B: it's always good to see your thoughts. I am in complete agreement with you about salvation.
I included you with ftd because he and I have been going back and forth on this. He has stated that the criteria for the Apostles was different than for Christians following the resurrection. Also, on this thread a chart was posted that on the bottom stated different criteria for salvation during different dispensations.
If dispensationalism does not hold to theories of various criteria than it would seem the only basis for criticism would be the belief that God is not done with the Jews.
I think you're right.
God Bless and have a good Thanksgiving.
You're right. God will preserve the elect.
Have you become a Calvinist?
Interesting points...However; look at what we have now...Some religions believe we need to work our way to salvation...Some believe we must get wet to get saved...Some believe we must be a member of a particular church to be Christians...
Some say we have to endure to the end...Some say we must live by the law to gain salvation...
The interesting thing is all these ideas can be found in the scripture...Some say we have to eat Jesus...
Some religons will twist, turn, pervert, torture and delete or add to these scriptures to make everything fit their particular theology...
Question is; does it make a difference what we believe???
If it DOES make a difference, then we have to be right in understanding Jesus and his written words...
Are some of us already worshipping the beast???
Yes!!!!
Are some of us already worshipping the beast???
If we are sure we would not only need to disassociate from it, but to warn everyone we could.
THANKS THANKS
LIKEWISE.
The criteria for the apostles was the same. All are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.
I truly do understand where the charge comes from; however, as stated, I have seen quotes by Scofield and others that either clarify or contradict such a charge.
If individual dispensationalists are off on this important point; it is not because that is what Scripture teaches or what dispensationalists as whole believe.
As to the charge that we believe God isn’t through with the Jews, I will happily plead guilty to that. He isn’t. And every Word of Scripture will be fulfilled; even his promises to Israel concerning their land in the Old Testament.
If this is the area of contention what is unique about the dispensationalist position verses the premillennialist position. I don't believe God is done with the Jews either.
Hope the turkey was good!
“And if ‘family’ and ‘clan’ mean the same thing, why change family to clan???”
Or why change “clan” to “family”? What does it matter when they mean the same thing?
When you can’t refute, you can always nitpick on a nonissue.
Amen. Rom.9-11.
That is the essential difference, that the church is not Israel and thus, does not receive those promises made to Israel in the unconditional covenants.
Amen.
At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn . They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. (NIV)
Even the NIV has all of the nation of the earth (not land) seeing Christ, so if the preterists can't slip 'land' in for 'earth', they have to assert that it is only 'apocalytic hyperbole'
So then, if Christians endure to the end, they will eventually be saved???
To them it will still be the Millennium.
Halleujah!
Classical Dispensationism has always maintained that one can only be saved by faith through grace after the Fall.
The essential difference between our views and that of the Covenant school, ( which is now being blurred by what is known as progressive' dispensationalism) is that the Church (the Body of Christ-composed of all those who are born again), is not Israel and once removed (rapture), Israel returns to the center of God's prophetic plan which will be completed with Christ sitting on the Davidic Throne,ruling a Millennial Kingdom from Jerusalem in a Temple described in Ezek. 40-48.
One fact which really upsets the Covenant school is the idea that sacrifices are started again, but those sacrifices are not for Atonement,(that having been paid for on the Cross by Christ, the Lamb of God), but only for reconciliation purposes.
I don't why the Gospel would split Jew and Gentile, except that the Jew is made jealous of the Gentile, as God intended (Rom.11).
Jew and Gentile are saved the same way, by faith, through grace, believing that Christ died for their sins and rose again (1Cor.15:3-4)
What the Jews of Christ's day rejected was the idea of a suffering Messiah, before a conquering one. Consider: You're aware of the John Hagee controversy, right? Do you find what he said as jarring as I do? Could his comments have come from any camp other than dispensationalism?
As for Hagee, he is confused, Christ certainly did offer Himself as the Messiah, but a suffering one (lamb of God) and was rejected-'we have no king but Caesar'.
The Jews could not see that their Messiah was to be both a suffering servant and a conquering King.
Even the Apostles had a hard time with this.
Thanks for the link!
They could only be saved as all before the cross could be saved, by faith in the unseen. IOW, faith that God the Father would not abandon them and he didn't he sent his Son to pay the price none could. Hebrews 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off were assured of them, embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. The surviving eleven Apostles did not understand the enormity of what Jesus did until the resurrected Jesus appeared to them. They had no special belief, or faith. Mark 16:14-16 Later he appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen. And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. The Apostles were ordinary flawed people like us. Despite seeing all the miracles they didn't "get it" until after the resurrection. If they did truly understand they would have followed Jesus to the Cross and been on a Cross as well. It seems this is the dividing line between dispensationalism and premillenialism. As a premill, I believe everyone from all ages has had the same criteria applied to them for justification. You are either righteous, or you have Faith in Jesus.
Everything you said is true, but the Apostles did not believe that Christ had to die for their sins, they thought that He had come to be the Jewish Messiah and rule a Kingdom (hence the question they asked about ruling in a kingdom (Matthew 20:21).
So, if the Apostles were not saved by believing on Christ dying for their sins, they had to be saved by believing in something else.
In their case, they believed the promises made to Israel and thus, were all saved men before Christ even chose them as His Apostles (with the exception of Judas)
Today, no one is saved unless they believe that Christ died for them on the Cross and rose again.
Thus, the content of the Gospel has changed, but not the method (faith by grace).
Ofcourse, Christ had to die for all of the sins of the world since that would be the legal basis of salvation from Adam through the final death in the Millennium.
By the way, the NIV translation also has earth, not land.
I haven't found any translation that translated Matthew 24:30 with the word 'land' instead of 'earth', which means that when Christ comes back He is seen by all of the peoples of the Earth, something that definitely did not happen in 70AD.
This is not speaking of judgment in the final sense, since all judgment has been given to the Son alone (Rom. 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9:27; 1 Peter 4:5). There is certainly a sense in which judgment in this world is a present reality (John 12:31).
However, I believe the image here is of the saints overcoming the world, and in a very real sense we already exercise judgment since we have been raised up and are seated with Christ, the supreme Judge, in the heavenly places (Eph. 2:5,6). This is the vindication of the Church over the authority of the Jews, old national Israel, who had exercised ecclesiastical judgment (cf. Matt. 23:2). The Church now occupies the responsibility of sitting, not in Moses’ seat, but on the throne with Christ.
Also, I don't think you should be putting premil and dispensationalism together as though they are one and the same. I don't believe God is done with the Jews and Israel, or that the millennial reign has begun. However, if dispensationalism believes that there are different criteria for justification in different eras I do not believe that.
I intended to simply highlight the common understanding between both groups is the future millennial reign of Christ on the earth from Jerusalem.
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.