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 ...
No. Faith is given to us.
Now let's go to the Jerusalem Council, and see what effect the new covenant caused, as different from the traditions of the Jews ... 1 AND the apostles and brethren, who were in Judea, heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, Saying: Why didst thou go in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them?Acts 11: 1- 3
Why would these Jewish CHRISTIANS ask such a question if they had been sharing and preaching the message as Paul was delivering to the Gentiles and the Jews in private sessions during his missionary journey?
As I told someone else earlier regarding the Acts 15 passage, as a matter of logic, the conclusion that Peter was prescriptively teaching a different gospel of the Kingdom does not necessarily follow from the mere descriptive fact that thousands of Jewish believers were all zealous of the law and that they were informed of Paul teaching the Jews who lived among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
So also here, the mere descriptive fact that when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, some who were of the circumcision contended with him asking him why he went in to men uncircumcised and ate with them, does not necessarily mean that Peter had been preaching a different gospel to them.
If the Grace of God in Christ as Paul offered the message had been the same offered tot he Jews who believed, why would there be any dispute over what should be preached unto the Gentiles as The Way?
Notice that what you emphasized in the passage says,
"5 But there arose some of the sect of the Pharisees that believed, saying: They must be circumcised, and be commanded to observe the law of Moses.6 And the apostles and ancients assembled to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing,..
Why would there be any dispute? Perhaps they were like FReepers. That these sects "arose" does not necessarily entail that Peter was teaching the sects these things.
There is no doubt that the revelations to Peter were progressive and that his understanding of God's plan got better, but imo that does not necessarily entail that he himself was prescriptively preaching a different gospel.
I think daniel1212 puts it very well in #723::
"These revealing aspects were progressively realized by the church, mainly thru Paul (and John in eschatology), but which did not essentially change the gospel. As said, using actual gospel messages (which were tailored for the knowledge and needs to the audience)"
Thank you again for taking the time to write those posts.
Cordially,
But the contention of HDs (hyperdispensationalists), such as reject water baptism, do have Peter preaching another gospel before being enlightened by Paul, which the gospel "we preach" then refers to. And thus i said that Paul would be accursed if he ever again preached the gospel of in Acts 2, and that of Acts 10, as the HD here also attacked that for likewise not explicitly saying Christ died for our sins.
The preaching of the Kingdom to come for Jews was indeed "good news" as it was an assurance that God would indeed keep His word to them.
But which preaching meant that the Messiah provided the needed atonement for sins, and that faith in Him obtained forgiveness and the Spirit, and which latter-day (which era the coming of Christ signified) promise was an extended one, that "it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh ..." "that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved ," (Acts 2:21), offered "to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." (Acts 2:39)
Likewise the message of Paul in Acts 13 is extended as, "whosoever among you feareth God , to you is the word of this salvation sent." (Acts 13:26)
Therefore, while not yet realizing that the New Covenant, which was distinctly "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers..." meant that obedience to the entire Law was not required, and thus the burden of the entire law and the danger of ritual uncleanness which hindered evangelism of the Gentiles (which Jews did engage in) was no longer a problem, yet both Peter and Paul essentially preached the same gospel from the start.
Which message was not that of the Judaizers which Paul wish would be cut off (or castrated) in Gal 5:12, that held that obedience to the entire law justified souls, but was basically that of the coming of the Messiah, who was rejected and unjustly slain by wicked men (thus requiring the hearers to make the opposite choice), whom God raised up, and thus the forgiveness of sins was thus provided thru repentant faith in Him. A faith which effected obedience, but which did not merit sinners justification before God.
Instead, implicit in promising forgiveness and regeneration by faith in Christ is that one is accepted by God on His account and expense," thus "whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."
And contrary to the assertion of two essentially different gospels, this is what Paul preached from the beginning, that his heavenly vision from the Lord was that the Gentiles "may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in Me," (Acts 26:18) Which is what he told the Jews and Gentiles, thus he "shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judæa, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance." (Acts 26:19-20)
Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles. (Acts 26:22-23)
Adaptations can be made and supplementary material given in consideration of the hearers, as seen in Acts (and also in the duplicate accounts material in the gospels), and most souls need to be also be made to realize how desperately the need forgiveness, and if need by, how sacrifice is needed for forgiveness (and Jews would recognize the death of the Holy and Just One and corespondent to the OT atonement). Yet the gospel message promises forgiveness by repentant faith in the sinless crucified and risen Messiah. Which is a implicit recognition of His Divinity.
That both the Hebrew preachers and hearers (which included non-Jews) expected the Lord to imminently set up His kingdom (which still meant children needed to be saved), yet this did not exclude Gentiles from being saved and part of that kingdom. We now see that the realization of the physical kingdom is simply delayed, but Gentiles are saved today by believing the basic message of Acts 2, though it is tailored to them as it was in Acts 10.
The explicit explanatory theological statements made by Paul and Peter in letters to Christians, which HDs use to assert that there are two gospels, are never clearly made by them in actually preaching the gospel in Acts. And that the ones by Peter in his letters, (1Pt. 1:18,19; 3:18) were due to enlightenment by Paul, and which HDs exclude as being understood by Peter and implicitly conveyed in Acts, lacks warrant.
And as explained before, both Peter and Paul promise salvation to those who believe with repentant faith and profess the Lord Jesus who died and rose again, (Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:39; Rm. 10:9-13) and there is no essential difference btwn moving the neurons in one's brain in believing, and the tongue in confessing, and the legs in doing the same in baptism. All are volitional responses enabled and motivated by God in His grace, apart from which man could not and would not believe, yet these do not merit justification.
While God also rewards faith in recognition of its effects, (Heb. 10:35) which character and works "justify" one as being a believer (Heb. 6:9) and fit to be rewarded, (Rv. 3:4) yet both the ability and motivation is of God, and the only thing man really deserves on his own accord is damnation. To God be the glory.
Indeed, and see 763 .
Am still seeking on this matter....just appears to me that the scripture indicates that when the thief died on the cross at that time saying “ Lord, remember me when thou come into your kingdom....And Jesus said unto him ...Verily I say unto thee, “Today” shalt thou be WITH ME in “Paradise.”....that the thief indeed went with Jesus that very day....so I am sure our soul goes ‘with’ the Lord. It’s just questionable where those who died before this time that is questionable it seems.
The reference to Abraham’s bosom is found only in Luke 16:22....
Those words might be considered a calling out to God...even though the actual day of my salvation came years later...it was 'calling' out to Him.....it really was more about doubting then faith that night...faith came later. But then the fact I was even talking to God was faith in action so it comes down to splitting hairs.
The most astonishing thing about The Grace of God in Christ is that we have not, cannot, and should not presume we can add to what Our Lord has already accomplished at Calvary. It is ONLY by His work at Calvary that salvation comes to any of us, and that salvation comes immediately when we faithe in His work for us. As many times as folks read the passages where the Holy Spirit comes during a gospel message, we still fail to accept that salvation / justification happens in an instant, when we first believe.
Some will stand at the Bema seat and nothing but the spark of the Holy Spirit deposited the moment they believed in Jesus will remain when their 'works' are tried as by fire. Others will take on a shine so bright ... well, you get the gist. God knows the heart of each of us and knows the difference between 'receiving the message with gladness' and rejecting the only means to Salvation when heard. The Jews in Jerusalem heard the Petrine message on the day of Pentecost, but some scoffed while others believed in their hearts that Peter spoke of The Christ, the Son of The Living God. Those that believed were instantly sealed by God's Holy Spirit unto that day of the Bema Seat of Christ. God didn't bother that day to remove their belief that the laws of Moses must be kept to make real their salvation. He is Sovereign and can tolerate a lot of foolishness because He loves His Son so much ... our salvation guarantee is based upon His righteousness and love, not our abilities to earn such Grace..
All that said, it is my opinion after four decades of studying the Bible that prior to the cross, the consciousness/soul of faithful ones went to a resting place which JESUS identified as 'Abraham's bosom'. Since the Cross and resurrection faithing souls/consciousness of believers now go to be with the Lord, as Paul taught 'to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord':
2 Corinthians 5:6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:Paul reinforced this point of where a faither's soul is, following death of the body, when he wrote to the ekklesia at Thessalonika that 'even so them also who are dead in Christ God will bring with Him' (1Thess4:13-18) referring to the Rapture of His Bride from the earth so that the man of sin may be revealed.2 Corinthians 5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
Bringing these souls with Christ to have new bodies united with their soul and then the alive at that time who are also 'faithers' in His atonement will be transformed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye with new bodies gathered together with the dead raised into the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.
Jesus need not set foot on Earth to take His bride out from here, so we can be with Him THERE. Jesus spoke directly to Saul on the road to Damascus without setting foot on Earth. This mysterious ability is explainable using the notion of dimensions, but that is grist for another mill.
One last note: I believe I can make a pretty good case that the seal of the Holy Spirit on our soul is the point of ‘resonance’ which will transform us in that twinkling of an eye, transform faithers —seal by His Holy Spirit— into higher dimensional beings who will be able then to see Him as He really is, The first fruits of this new creation by God, in higher dimensional state.
The Bible speaks of Jesus as.....”the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev 13:8).....So this indicates that in the mind of God, Christ’s death was as good as done, even before the world was created.
Then 800 years or so ‘before’ Jesus died, Isaiah wrote of His death ‘in the past tense’,......”the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all” (Isa 53:6).
Paul says,..... “Whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance ‘God had passed over the sins that were previously committed” (Rom 3:25)
Paul says,.... “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness... ..(Rom 4:3, 5). Using Abraham as an example, Paul demonstrates that, before Jesus came, people were saved by faith alone.... not by their works.... Jesus said, “Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad” (John 8:56 )....Therefore, he was saved by faith alone in Christ before he actually came.
God could pass over the sins of men committed before Jesus came because, in His mind, Jesus had already paid for those sins. Therefore, this says to me that before Jesus came, people were saved on the basis of His death for their sins.
We also see Job made a similar statements,..... “I know that my Redeemer lives, and He shall stand at last on the earth. And after my skin is destroyed, this I know, that in my flesh I shall see God” (Job 19:25 -26). Two thousand years before Jesus came, Job knew that his Redeemer was coming to this earth to pay the price for his sins. Job had a certain assurance that because of his Redeemer, he would live with God after his death.
Moses even wrote about Christ. As Jesus said to the Jews, .....”For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me” (John 5:46 ).
Abraham, Job, and Moses show that before Jesus came, people were saved by believing in the Christ who was yet to come.
Even before the NT was completed, Jesus and His followers verbally told people the way of salvation, sometimes using passages from the OT to explain it..... For example, Jesus used the story of Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness to help explain the gospel to Nicodemus (John 3:14 -16)....... Philip presented the gospel to the Ethiopian eunuch, he explained that Isaiah wrote about Jesus when he said, “He was led as a sheep to the slaughter” (Acts 8:26 -35).
Since the NT has been completed, the message of the Gospel of John has been ‘spread verbally’ by evangelists and other believers......Verbal proclamation is still God’s primary method of spreading the gospel, just as it was before Jesus came..... As Paul says in Rom 10:14-15,.... “How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written:.... ‘How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!’ “
Just like you and I are saved - by faith alone in Christ alone. For them, it was by faith in the Christ who had not yet come. For us, it is by faith in the same Christ who has come.
No one has ever been or ever will be saved apart from believing in Christ for eternal life.
You might want to add/incorporate the story Jesus told of the wedding prepared and a guest trying to attend without the wedding garment ...
Matt 22:11
My point in that post was that I do believe people were saved before Christ came because they believed he was coming.....and they are with Him.
There seems to be a lot of dispute about where they went....but I’m convinced they are with Him....be it Abraham’s , Paradise, or Heaven.... or all places none of us know about..but there sure is a lot of debate about what they mean and are and purpose of. The significance of it all is they are with Christ.
First let me say that I am not convinced one way or the other as to the immediacy of being in heaven upon death or if there is a period of “sleep” prior. I lean toward the “sleep” position but would not claim anyone wrong for the other view. That said, the passage you quoted by Paul to the Corinthians “I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord” would not give definitive proof one way or the other. Paul simply said what he would “prefer”. That doesn’t indicate the immediacy of that upon death. The “two or three” witness from scripture hasn’t been met imo.
Great points! It has always been by faith.
They are NOT different gospels as far as salvation is concerned. I am at a loss as to why people don't understand that. No one has said salvation comes by any other means then faith in the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Peter even still just prior to the meeting at the house of Cornelius was focused on the Jews and had to be told in vision and revelation.
HDThe scriptures often talk about people being gathered with their fathers, but where was that? It is apparent that people in the Old Testament believed that 1) they would be gathered with their love ones, 2) it would be pleasant and forever, and 3) it would be in the presences of the Lord. David certainly did as he talked about it in the Psalms.
They went to Sheol.
Job 17:16 Will they go down to the gates of Sheol? Shall we have rest together in the dust?
Ps. 16:10 For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.
Jesus Christ elaborated on Sheol being divided into two parts divided by a chasm. One part was referred to as Abraham's Bosom and the other Hades (see Luke 16:19-26). When Jesus was crucified he descended and preached victory to the captives held in Abraham's Bosom, this is also commonly known of as Paradise. The Gates of Hades could not contain Jesus Christ's followers who recognized He was the fulfillment of their faith in God and Jesus led these captives to Heaven.
Eph. 4:8-9 "When He ascended on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts to men." (Now this, "He ascended"-what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth?).
HD I posed the initial question to illustrate that dispensationalists do not believe there were/are different paths to salvation. Our salvation is always because of God's Grace given to us because of our Faith Alone in Christ Alone. The OT saints did not get to go to Heaven prior to the Cross because they had Faith in God. The sacrifice for sin had to be made first. However God in his perfect justice was also perfect in His mercy and provided for those that had Faith. So while dispensationalists do believe God interacted with His creation in different ways at different times (dispensations) we do not believe that we are saved in different ways at different times.
HD, I hope you don't mind I pinged a bunch of folks (including the Dispensational Caucus). It's not often enough we get to have a good theological discussion.
That is evidently difficult for many to understand.
I'm sure there are some that just don't want to understand this, but there are others (such as myself at one time) who have never had it explained. I know in my case it took a while for me to "get it". I had to start asking questions that I always thought were just "mysteries". However, the more I dug into it the more saw how God is not only perfect in His justice but His mercy is so beyond description.
It can get frustrating trying to explain something we see so clearly, but in the discussion among Brothers and Sisters in Christ a lot gets learned.
"I love to tell the story, of unseen things above . . ."
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.