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 ...
Excellent position, Buggman. True Wisdom.
No secret. Paul confirmed the same gospel he preached was the same gospel Cephas and the 11 preached:
1 Corinthians 15:
15 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. 8 Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.
9 For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.
If Pentecost is not the beginning of the ekklesia, the church, then where do you put in time the beginning of the church? Obviously from your comments and those of smvoice (cc'd), it is not Acts 2. If not Acts 2 where the Holy Spirit is poured out on believers then where? Acts 7? Acts 9?, Acts 10? 15?, Acts 28? or after Acts 28? I asked the same questions to smvoice and they were not addressed. So I ask you now if you please. Why? Because it matters. If the church did not start with a 'bang' as in Pentecost, then we need to nail down when it did. It matters because men of God taught and said things throughout the history of Acts.
I remember. I also remember we could not get the opposing view to 'nail down' a 'time' where this gospel transition happened. We never got an answer then, nor am I getting an answer now.
You can't say that it happened on June 14 at 3:00. But you CAN say that you KNOW, according to Paul's epistles, that it could NOT have begun before HE was saved and given the gospel of the grace of God to give to the Gentiles. I'm sorry you cannot understand this.
I don’t think your Acts 3 passage works for you like you would think. Peter wasn’t telling them the Jesus died for their sins. He told them He suffered just as their prophets had told them and that they needed to change that their sins may be forgiven just as they had been told throughout the Old Testament. And then look at verse 20 “and that he may send the Messiah, who has been appointed for you—even Jesus”. That he may “send the Messiah”? Peter was still talking about Jesus coming back as King and ruler in Israel.
Based on your post when did this transition from a kingdom gospel to a gospel of grace take place? At what point in Acts? At what point did the gospel of Christ crucified, died and risen change to another gospel? This matters because Jesus Christ commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel to all nations.
As I pointed out, 1 Corinthians 15 Paul states “Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.”
And if the gospel of Grace is not Christ crucified, died, and risen from the dead for the remission of sins (as Peter preached in Acts), then how do you define “Grace?”
I am sorry you did not understand my question.
At what point did Peter and the 11 abandon the kingdom gospel and start preaching the grace gospel? Obviously God is not a God of confusion and would not have two sets of 'called out ones' and would settle for just one gospel for the 'Greek and Jew.' So when did that happen? Mid Acts, late Acts? After Acts?
Also, if the Gospel of Grace is not Christ crucified, died, and risen from the dead for the remission of sins (as Peter preached) then what is it? What work of Paul defines the Gospel message that he preached and Cephas and the 11 preached?
I hear what your saying Buggman but it’s been quite some time already that we have been exposing the truth about Rood. Even to the extent of his changing the meaning of words of scripture. But still you are correct. We will see.
See Cynical Bear’s post 505. I am going to let the Holy Spirit handle this. After all, it is God that “hath revealed them unto us by His Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God” 1 Cor. 2:10. His job is to reveal truth.
Has that been time just on this thread, or is this an ongoing conversation?
It’s been well over a year now Buggman.
.
>> “The Words say what they say” <<
But you need to keep reading until you get to the words. They are definitely there.
.
Dear jimeny crickets, redleghunter, can you not read simple words? I have stated again and Again and AGAIN that the “gospel of the grace of God is Christ dying FOR OUR SINS, being buried, and then being raised again on the third day for our salvation. It is PETER who did not preach Christ dying FOR OUR SINS FOR SALVATION. Read his Pentecost sermon again. He preached Christ dying, being buried and rising again the third day as kingdom gospel. That when Israel as a nation realized that Christ was INDEED their prophesied Messish, they repented and were baptized so that the days of refreshing might come and God would send Christ back. Read Peter’s sermon AS IT IS WRITTEN, WORD FOR WORD. And don’t try to anticipate revelation that had yet to be revealed. You know it’s there because you’re HERE, looking back. But they did not have that luxury. They were told by Peter that Joel’s prophecy concerning Israel and Messiah’s eminent return to set up His kingdom was happening. And they believed it. So much that they repented, were baptized, gave all they had away and had all things in common, and awaited the eminent return of their Messiah, Jesus Christ. Read CB’s post 505. I cannot keep posting the same things again and again. Unless you decide to actually READ WHAT GOD’S WORD ACTUALLY SAYS>
Acts 3:
17 “Yet now, brethren, I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers. 18 But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. 19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord,
The elements are all there, as Paul also confirms in 1 Corinthians 15. That the Christ was crucified, died, risen. Then the key words of "so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord."
How is that a kingdom gospel?
If Peter and the 11 preached only the kingdom gospel and Paul the Gospel of Grace, then at what point did Peter and the 11 shift from the kingdom message and take up the grace message?
Also, at what point did Paul cease teaching or preaching the kingdom gospel?
If Peter and the 11 preached a kingdom gospel on Pentecost what is it based on? The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ or promises of furthering the Law of Moses?
I also know you to be a man who studies God's Word. How many times do we correct people on this site for picking out pet theologies based on one or a few passages from a historical book as in Acts? Theologians consider Acts a historical recording of the events of the early church. My point is, if one wants to see what Peter preached in detail to Jews and Gentiles, they should look at his epistles. As many here keep quoting Paul's epistles, we should do the same for Peter.
1 Peter 1:
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, 7 that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ, 8 whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, 9 receiving the end of your faith—the salvation of your souls. 10 Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, 11 searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. 12 To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things which angels desire to look into.
Frankly, the above looks to be an expanded version of Peter's sermon in Acts 3. All the elements are there. In 1 Peter 1, Peter is teaching. In Acts 3 he is preaching. Luke is recording a historical event. He faithfully enters the key elements of the Christ's gospel message in Luke 24 in Peter's Acts 3 speech. Historians truncate, or telescope events to address key points.
Then I definitely understand your frustration.
But the jews then committed the unforgivable sin. They denied the holy ghost and they spent almost 2,000 years in dispersal because of it and God changed the program to the mysteries that Paul spoke of.
The apostles never went out to all the nations preaching the good news. They stayed in Jerusalem, argued a bunch and disappeared. While Paul was able to spread the good news to the gentiles and the gospel went out to the world.
Soon the Body of Christ will depart from this world and everything will pick up where it was 2,000 years ago. The jews in the land waiting for the earthly kingdom but first the last seven years of Daniel
You need to shed that fairy tale.
It puts scales over your eyes.
If you spent just a small time on youtube watching the early stuff he did, the truth will come blasting through. He has never tolerated the use of the false title “Rabbi,” nor of the unscriptural artifacts that surround much of the “messianic” crowd.
That is why they attack him. That crud is dear to the Jewabies.
Maybe it happened when the Jews rejected the holy ghost.
Here is Les’s take on the unpardonable sin of unbelief.
I cant put all this into my words so I will post from his teachings again.
This is a real eye opener.
Take your Bible and join in with us for this study. Once you get into the Book of Books you just can’t beat it. It is just so fabulous. So many people have the idea it’s just a musty, dusty, old Book and just a bunch of Bible stories, and it’s not. Everything fits from cover to cover, and it’s all written so miraculously. That’s why we know it’s not an ordinary Book, but rather the Divine, inspired Word of God, and is everything that God said it is. As I’ve said before, I just want to look at the “overall plan of the ages,” as someone has put it, and hit some of the high points, and some of the passages that questions arise from.
In Matthew Chapter 12, beginning with verse 31, we have a few little verses that have raised so many questions. This passage used to bother me also, but when you come to any portion of Scripture, be ready to constantly ask questions from your own point of view. Right here we have what people normally call the “unpardonable sin.” When something is unpardonable, that means it’s going to be your doom. In other words, if you are guilty of the unpardonable sin, then you have no hope of glory, and are headed for the lake of fire. I’ve looked at these verses in the knowledge that, the only sin that is going to condemn anyone, Jew or Gentile, black or white, rich or poor is not any particular thing we have said, or deed we have done. There is only one thing that will condemn a person to the lake of fire, and that is “UNBELIEF.”
We are not talking about unbelief here, we are talking about something that is spoken. Let me prove my point. Before we look at Matthew 12, let’s look at the Book of Hebrews Chapter 3 for a moment. Maybe I can make my point from the reverse end. I don’t want someone to go through life scared to death that maybe they have committed the unpardonable sin, which most people feel, according to Matthew 12 is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is a sin, and there is no doubt about it. But if I understand Scripture correctly, there is no sin that the Grace of God doesn’t reach beyond. In other words, the most violent of sinners are still candidates of the Grace of God. But what do they have to do? “BELIEVE.”
I think the Apostle Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews that we are now going to look at. He is taking the experience of Israel having just come out of Egypt, with God leading them to the Promised Land. When they got to Kadesh Barnea, who’s idea was it to send in spies? It certainly wasn’t God’s. God had never intended for them go search out the land. God said, “Go in and take the land, and I’ll send in hornets ahead of you and drive the people out.” But Israel couldn’t even take God at His word at that point in time. So they hedge and say, “Well let us spy it out first.” God in His goodness then condescended to their request and said, “Alright, choose out twelve men and let them go in.” And that was one of the biggest mistakes that Israel ever made. Ten of them said, “Oh, we can’t do it. There is no way we can drive out the Canaanites, we are as grasshoppers in their sights.” God had already said that He would drive them out. So what was their problem?
Hebrews 3:15-18
“While it is said, `To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation (in other words, as Israel was there in the wilderness). For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses. But with whom was he (God) grieved forty years? Was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness? And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that (what?) believed not?’”
They had committed many sins of immorality; the golden calf; all pagan practices of worship. But God is not holding that against them - He doesn’t even mention that, as vile as it was. He could forgive that kind of sin. But what was Israel’s problem? “UNBELIEF.” They couldn’t believe what God had said.
Hebrews 3:19
“So we see that they (the children of Israel) could not enter in because of unbelief.”
Has anything changed? No! God can forgive to the uttermost, any sin except the sin of UNBELIEF (when people refuse to believe that Christ died for them, paid their sin debt, and rose from the dead in power. And that’s all He’s asking). So believe it for your salvation! If a person refuses to believe that Gospel, then that person’s doom is sealed. Remember Hebrews 11:6 says to you and I in the Age of Grace:
Hebrews 11:6
“But without faith it is impossible to please him....”
Let’s go back to Matthew 12 and look at the unpardonable sin. We need to leave this verse right where it sits. This is God dealing with the Nation of Israel. This doesn’t mean that we can’t take some warning from it. I certainly don’t tell people to go out and blaspheme the Holy Spirit, because after all, God will forgive you. I would never do that. All I’m saying is that this is something that doesn’t fit Church doctrine. If you can learn to leave these things where they belong, you don’t have to pigeonhole them, and say you’ll come back to this at a later time. It’s so perfectly set. So to the Nation of Israel He says:
Matthew 12:31,32
“Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man (Christ), it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world (age), neither in the world (age) to come.”
Now let’s look at a parable that explains this so beautifully in Matthew 21. Jesus is speaking again to the Jews:
Matthew 21:33,34
“Hear another parable: `There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:’”
“And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants (to get some return on the investment that he had made) to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits (or profit) of it.”
Matthew 21:35-42
“And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, `They will reverence my son.’ But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, `This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.’ And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him, When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen (and remember this is Jesus asking the Jew). They say unto him, `He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.’ Jesus saith unto them, `Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?’”
Matthew 21:43-45
“Therefore say I unto you, `The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.’ And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables (plural, not just this one, but everyone that He had spoken), they perceived that he spake of them.”
They suddenly understood that Jesus was pointing His finger at them. Now what was the parable all about? God called the Nation of Israel out, and gave them the Covenant promises. He called them His son, His favored nation. And He dealt with them through the Old Testament years by sending the prophets. What did they do to the prophets? They killed them. We always like to talk in terms of the Trinity. So let’s look at it this way. Remember the Jew only knew about God the Father. So God the Father sent the prophets to His Covenant people and they killed them, or threw them in the dungeons. They refused to hear them. Did God cancel the Nation of Israel because of that? No. God sent His only Son next, The Christ. And Christ presented Himself to the Nation of Israel, on the basis of the covenants that we have been emphasizing for months. And what did they do with the Son? They killed Him. So these Pharisees are picking up on it. He’s talking about them. And so it is in all of Jesus’ parables.
But we have one Person of the Trinity left out. The Holy Spirit. Let’s look at the Scripture that pertains to the Holy Spirit. And if you can’t go along with this, don’t worry about it. I’ve always said in my teaching there is room for you to disagree on some things, and this is one of them. But to me it makes sense in light of the fact that there is one sin that condemns us, and that is unbelief concerning the Gospel. In other words, I maintain, someone could blaspheme the Holy Spirit tomorrow or next week and God can still save him in this Age of Grace. But let’s not lose sight of what the unpardonable sin is dealing with, and that is Israel the Nation! She is the one that is coming under this anathema of God.
Now go to Acts Chapter 6. Israel has rejected the overtures from the Father by killing the prophets. They rejected the overtures of the Son by killing The Christ. But how are they going to deal with the Holy Spirit, because here is the unpardonable part now - how they deal with third Person of the Godhead. He could forgive the first two, but not the third one. We have, in Acts Chapter 6, the appointment of seven men, normally referred to as deacons. They get the word “deacon” from the description of their duties. We find in verse 3 that the early Jewish church in Jerusalem was having some problems and so the following happened:
They remained in Jerusalem. BTW: the church which was at Jerusalem was the kingdom church, established by Christ and given to the 12 apostles, the little flock, and all who believed, repented, and were baptized when Peter preached his great Pentecost sermon. It was a Messianic Church, by Jews, for Jews, awaiting the return of their Messiah to set up His kingdom, whereby they would become a nation of priest to the Gentile world. That is how the Gentiles would have learned about Christ.
Acts 6:3
“Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.”
Acts 6:5
“And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost,...” Now we have the Holy Spirit mentioned twice in two verses. So Stephen comes before this whole Jewish crowd.
Acts 6:15
“And all that sat in the council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.”
What is permeating Stephen? The presence of the Holy Spirit. It was so radiant they could see the difference. Go to Chapter 7 verse 2. Now watch the language of whom Stephen is addressing:
Acts 7:2
“And he said, `Men, brethren, and fathers (all Jews), hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham,...’” Can any Gentile claim that? Of course not.
If you ever want the history of the Nation of Israel in a nutshell, read this whole chapter. It even gives a lot of little details that the Old Testament leaves out.
Acts 7:54
“And when they (these Jews) heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.”
Acts 7:55
“But he, being full of the Holy Ghost (do you see the emphasis over and over that the Holy Spirit is on display here?), looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus (not sitting but rather) standing on the right hand of God,” In a future lesson, we’ll pick up the reason these Jews got so mad when they heard Stephen say that Jesus was standing.
Acts 7:58-60
“And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man’s feet, whose name was Saul. And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, `Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.’ And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, `Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep (died).’”
From this point on, what is the future as we see here in the Book of Acts concerning the Nation of Israel? All down hill. And why? Because they had now committed that unpardonable sin of not only rejecting the Father and The Son, but now had also rejected the Holy Spirit. And for nearly 2000 years, what has the Jew been going through? Suffering, turmoil, in a state of spiritual blindness. Here in America they are pretty fortunate, but overall for all this time, basically they have been going through the mill. But when this age ends and we come into the next age, which is the millennium reign, Israel is going to come into God’s goodness and Grace. If you don’t like that approach about the unpardonable sin you don’t have to agree. But for me it fits so beautifully, because we have left it in place. Notice we didn’t take it out of the Nation of Israel and try to put it in the Church Age, but left it right where it was, with the Jewish economy.
Another point I would like to make is this. After the stoning of Stephen and the Holy Spirit aspect, the next event of importance in the chronological unfolding is the conversion of what great man? Saul of Tarsus (Paul). Even though Peter will go to the house of Cornelius in Acts Chapter 10 (after Saul is converted in Chapter 9), Chapters 11 and 15 mention Peter, and from there to the end of the Book of Acts Peter is never mentioned again. Why? Israel is now falling out of all the things that God had been promising, and now here comes Paul with the Body of Christ, the predominately Gentile Church. When we study the Book of Acts, I’ll show you the transitional aspect of this Book, how God deals with His Covenant people Israel under the Law with all the Old Testament promises; and how when they rejected it, God now does something totally different - something the Old Testament knew nothing of. He turned to the Gentiles with the Apostle Paul
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.