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 ...
.
>> “Read Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost. And show me which scripture says that “Christ died for your sins”. Read it until you find it. It’s not there.” <<
.
Wow!
That message is in the gospels. It had already been spread throughout the Mediterranean region by the hundreds of disciples that had been sent out well before Pentecost.
Peter and all the rest of the apostles preached to Israel because Yeshua was sent to Israel, specifically the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel. But that included all that sojourned with them.
Cornelius was a man that wanted to sojourn with them. Peter at first did not grasp that, having been raised in the falsehood of Phariseeism, and needed a personal wake-up call, which he got in the vision.
.
PROVE that Catholicism was the ONLY church for 16 centuries. PROVE that no other people existed. Or stop saying it. If you cannot prove it, you cannot state it as fact. And have any respect.
Prove that it was spread well before Pentecost. Show me the Scriptures that say it.
All of the Catholic churches are basically in communion with one another. None is older than the Roman church because that is where Peter went and where he was crucified.....The Eastern rite Catholics are in every respect Catholic and again, the protestants did not come into existence until Luther showed up...
PROVE that is where Peter went. PROVE it from Scripture. Or stop giving it as fact.
.
2 Tim. 2:15 addresses the teaching of false doctrine, and nothing else.
Trying to tie it to dispensationalism is some of the false doctrine that is covered by that verse.
The entirety of 2Timothy is about those that preach false doctrine, and how Timothy was to deal with it.
We don’t need this kind of deep deception that comes from wildly misinterpreting 2 Tim. 2:15.
.
You haven’t read the gospels?
You missed the sending out?
Where do we start?
Sure it does....and I read perversion of scripture here all the time..
When people deny that "THIS IS MY BODY" means this is My body, then they are perverting scripture
OBVIOUSLY it means rightly dividing truth from truth. NOT truth from a lie. There is no lie in God's word. Rightly dividing truth from truth is exactly what gives you dispensationalism. But you cannot see this
We can say that repeatedly, until we're blue in the face, and they will not hear it.
Thinking about it, the only Christians groups I know of that place eschatology at the same doctrinal level as Christology are modern (as opposed to historic) pre-tribulational dispensationalists.
LOL! WHICH “gospels”? The Gospel of the kingdom, found in Matt Mark Luke John and Acts 1-3 and Heb. through Rev.? Or the Gospel of the Grace of God? Found in Romans through Philemon and Acts 9-28?
Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of 'making it personal'. Discuss the issues all you want but do not make it personal.
.
To the assembly that is his body!
That assembly was nothing new. It had existed at the time of Adam.
Nothing in Paul’s epistles speaks of any “church age.”
It was the time of the apostles, which definitely differed from the time of the great prophets, in that it was expanding due to the fulfillment of the covenant in Yeshua’s blood.
At the time of the prophets it was a promise, not yet an accomplished fact. It took more faith in those days. Only the strong followed God.
You are absolutely right. I should have said “you appear to refuse to see”. Is that right?
Yes.
How would you know? You don’t APPEAR to have Paul’s epistles in your Bible. You certainly don’t APPEAR to read them.
The entire epistle was on the same subject.
Teaching Timothy to deal with false doctrine.
Rightly dividing the word of truth from the false words of decievers.
There is nothing else mentioned to divide it from.
To say that the word itself is to be divided makes Yeshua and The Father liars.
Nowhere does Yeshua declare multiple sets of commandments, and in Matthew 5 he totally rebukes that idea, declaring that Torah is in full force for as long as the Earth and Heavens exist!
One word, and only one.
.
.
Deceptive diversion is in no way helpful.
Most here know what “the gospels” are, and have read them.
Fantasy land at best.
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.