Dispensationalism

Pedrito · Jul 6, 2015

1. Thank you twin1954.

2. In Post #99, JM stated:

In Acts 2 we are told is ruling and reigning now from at the right hand of the Father;

Well, the inspired Scripture actually says “at the right hand of God”.

In fact (from the MKJV):
v22 … Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by powerful works, and wonders and miracles, which God did through Him in your midst ...
v23 this One given [to you] by the before-determined counsel and foreknowledge of God …
v24 whom God raised up ...
v32 God raised up this Jesus, of which we all are witnesses.
v33 Therefore being exalted to the right of God ...
v34 … The LORD said to my Lord, Sit at My right [hand]
v36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God made this same Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Was not Peter a Jew, speaking here to Jews, on the occasion of an important Jewish festival, using a definition (God) that had been immutable throughout their history?

Now maybe in the light of later Church Councils (325 – when the Binity was defined, and 381 – when the Trinity was defined), we may understand that Peter and his hearers had an immature perception of the nature of God. But should not the Inspired Word of God be quoted and paraphrased as it was written? Did God not have a purpose in having it recorded the way He did?

And with respect to v33 “... and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit ...”, might it be pertinent to investigate whether or not the term “the Father” had its own specific meaning to Peter and his hearers? (As opposed to a definition that was developed later?)

Would it be a stumbling block of some kind to learn that as God revealed Himself to Israel in the Old Testament writings, the terms “God” and “the Father” were synonymous? i.e. In the apostle Peter's mind, God was the Father, and the Father was God. God = the Father, and the Father = God.

If a review of the God's revelation to Israel shows that that is the case, and that disclosure generates feelings of discomfort, then may not something be amiss somewhere?

And what light does it throw on Jesus' use of the term “the Father”?

JM · Jul 6, 2015

Pedrito,

You will have to lay out what you believe the verse means and how your understanding of the verse supports the modern Dispensational idea of separating the church and Israel into two different peoples of God.

Dispensationalism was invented and gain popular support through Gospel Hall/Brethren Christians and caused division.

”My brother, I am a constant reader of my Bible, and I soon found that what I was taught to believe (by Darby’s doctrine) did not always agree with what my Bible said. I came to see that I must either part company with John Darby, or my precious Bible, and I chose to cling to my Bible and part from Mr. Darby.” – George Müeller, a contemporary and one time supporter of Darby quoted by Robert Cameron in his book SCRIPTURAL TRUTH ABOUT THE LORD’S RETURN, pp.146-7

Former Dispey Philip Mauro:

"It is greatly to be regretted that those who, in our day, give themselves to the study and exposition of prophecy, seem not to be aware of the immense significance of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, which was accompanied by the extinction of Jewish national existence, and the dispersion of the Jewish people among all the nations. The failure to recognize the significance of that event, and the vast amount of prophecy which it fulfilled, has been the cause of great confusion, for the necessary consequence of missing the past fulfillment of predicted events is to leave on our hands a mass of prophecies for which we must needs contrive fulfillments in the future. The harmful results are two fold; for first, we are thus deprived of the evidential value, and the support to the faith, of those remarkable fulfillments of prophecy which are so clearly presented to us in authentic contemporary histories; and second, our vision of things to come is greatly obscured and confused by the transference to the future of predicted events which, in fact, have already happened, and whereof complete records have been preserved for our information."

"It is mortifying to remember that I not only held and taught these novelties myself, but that I even enjoyed a complacent sense of superiority because thereof, and regarded with feelings of pity and contempt those who had not received the ‘new light’ and were unacquainted with this up-to-date method of ‘rightly dividing the word of truth’... The time came... when the inconsistencies and self-contradictions of the system itself, and above all, the impossibility of reconciling its main positions with the plain statement of the Word of God, became so glaringly evident that I could not do otherwise than to renounce it"

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Chicken Little · Jul 6, 2015

classicalhero said:
Jesus does say that if the people of Sodom and Gomorrah knew what Jesus did to the people in Gallilee, they would have repented and that as a result God will judge them more harshly than peoples of Sodom and Gomorrah. The more we know about God the more we will be judged according to our knowledge. And with each dispensation e know more about God than the previous one.

I too think he is adding concept on concept , life to life until he is known and none of it is over until the 8th day.
those willing to follow him to the next day , and die to full concepts of the last day and or allow him to refine those concepts and truths to bring that in to the next day. these mini plays of death , burial , resurrection / feasts are over and over. why because we haven't had the last one yet and that is what we are really preparing for.

twin1954 · Jul 6, 2015

Pedrito said:
1. Thank you twin1954.

2. In Post #99, JM stated:

Well, the inspired Scripture actually says “at the right hand of God”.

In fact (from the MKJV):
v22 … Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by powerful works, and wonders and miracles, which God did through Him in your midst ...
v23 this One given [to you] by the before-determined counsel and foreknowledge of God …
v24 whom God raised up ...
v32 God raised up this Jesus, of which we all are witnesses.
v33 Therefore being exalted to the right of God ...
v34 … The LORD said to my Lord, Sit at My right [hand]
v36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God made this same Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Was not Peter a Jew, speaking here to Jews, on the occasion of an important Jewish festival, using a definition (God) that had been immutable throughout their history?

Now maybe in the light of later Church Councils (325 – when the Binity was defined, and 381 – when the Trinity was defined), we may understand that Peter and his hearers had an immature perception of the nature of God. But should not the Inspired Word of God be quoted and paraphrased as it was written? Did God not have a purpose in having it recorded the way He did?

And with respect to v33 “... and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit ...”, might it be pertinent to investigate whether or not the term “the Father” had its own specific meaning to Peter and his hearers? (As opposed to a definition that was developed later?)

Would it be a stumbling block of some kind to learn that as God revealed Himself to Israel in the Old Testament writings, the terms “God” and “the Father” were synonymous? i.e. In the apostle Peter's mind, God was the Father, and the Father was God. God = the Father, and the Father = God.

If a review of the God's revelation to Israel shows that that is the case, and that disclosure generates feelings of discomfort, then may not something be amiss somewhere?

And what light does it throw on Jesus' use of the term “the Father”?

You are welcome.

Now I want you to consider that Jesus said that those who have seen Him have seen the Father. He is the revelation of the Godhead in a body. I think that you know the Scriptures that refer to this. If you do not then I will give them to you.

Now consider that the Lord Jesus is called the everlasting Father in Isa. 9:6

(Isa 9:6) For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

While the Father is a separate Being He is one with the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord prayed to the Father yet thought it not robbery to be equal with Him. Phil. 2:6

Each Person of the Godhead has a different office and a different work in the glorification of His great name. The Father chose, elected, a people to be the objects of the love and mercy of God. The Son redeemed all that the Father chose and put in the Son. The Spirit applies all that the Father purposed, the Son accomplished unto all the elect of God. They are all one in nature, essence and being but have different duties, for lack of a better way of describing it. They each take part in the salvation of sinners to the great glory of the name of God. Paul makes it very clear in Col. 1:18 that Christ shall have the preeminence.

We cannot see the Father for He is spirit. We cannot see the Spirit which is obvious, but we can see the Son, now with the eye of faith and soon with the eye of a redeemed and purified soul in the resurrection.

Winepress777 · Jul 6, 2015

briquest said:
1 Peter 4:11King James Version (KJV)
11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
2 Timothy 2:15King James Version (KJV)
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
King James Version (KJV)
by Public Domain
ACTS 8:29
29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:
33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth
34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

Matthew 24:25
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Amen. There goes that ridiculous "dispensationalism" theory right out the window

twin1954 · Jul 6, 2015

Winepress777 said:
Amen. There goes that ridiculous "dispensationalism" theory right out the window

I am at a loss as to how these passages relate. In the 2Tim. 2:15 passage the word doesn't mean to separate but to cut straight. Dispensationalists want to separate not cut straight. They take the word divide literally and go about dividing the Word into separate dispensations. It is utter nonsense. Paul isn't instructing Timothy to separate the Word he is instructing him to understand the Word in a straight line and by a straight, unswerving, truth. How ridiculous it is to cut up the Word (which has one theme, Jesus Christ and His person and work, one truth and one revelation) into sections that relate to the Jews in the future and us today. Dispensationalists divide the word and make it a mess of jumbled and convoluted sayings that make no sense at all.

Winepress777 · Jul 7, 2015

twin1954 said:
I am at a loss as to how these passages relate. In the 2Tim. 2:15 passage the word doesn't mean to separate but to cut straight. Dispensationalists want to separate not cut straight. They take the word divide literally and go about dividing the Word into separate dispensations. It is utter nonsense. Paul isn't instructing Timothy to separate the Word he is instructing him to understand the Word in a straight line and by a straight, unswerving, truth. How ridiculous it is to cut up the Word (which has one theme, Jesus Christ and His person and work, one truth and one revelation) into sections that relate to the Jews in the future and us today. Dispensationalists divide the word and make it a mess of jumbled and convoluted sayings that make no sense at all.

Well, I was raised a dispensationalist, and I struggled hard against scriptures for years before the Holy Spirit won over in rightly dividing the word of Truth. I know how hard it is to overcome that teaching of the devil. It is deep, sort of wrapped around the spirit, like a ball and chain. But the Lord has mercy thank God. He opens eyes, yes He can. The NT is the fulfillment of the OT. Israel is redeemed Ta Daa thank you Jesus!

Job8 · Jul 7, 2015

Winepress777 said:
Well, I was raised a dispensationalist, and I struggled hard against scriptures for years before the Holy Spirit won over in rightly dividing the word of Truth. I know how hard it is to overcome that teaching of the devil. It is deep, sort of wrapped around the spirit, like a ball and chain

To call Dispensationalist teaching the "teaching of the devil" is not only insulting but downright ignorant. Please prove exactly how it is a teaching of the devil, or withdraw your ridiculous allegation.

It is astounding that there is such vitriolic opposition to a system of interpreting Scripture that is not only valid, but can be clearly supported by Scripture itself. But then truth is always bitterly opposed, and we see that in the lives of Christ and His apostles. I will challenge any anti-dispensationalist posting here to prove from Scripture that dispensational teaching is false doctrine.

Winepress777 · Jul 7, 2015

Job8 said:
To call Dispensationalist teaching the "teaching of the devil" is not only insulting but downright ignorant. Please prove exactly how it is a teaching of the devil, or withdraw your ridiculous allegation.

It is astounding that there is such vitriolic opposition to a system of interpreting Scripture that is not only valid, but can be clearly supported by Scripture itself. But then truth is always bitterly opposed, and we see that in the lives of Christ and His apostles. I will challenge any anti-dispensationalist posting here to prove from Scripture that dispensational teaching is false doctrine.

I give testimony to you before God and man that I was dead in my sins before I received Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel is exactly what I am saying and I don't retract that for no man.

He is MY KING. The KING OF ISRAEL. Do I need to show you scriptures for that? Or are you going to continue ripping the heart out of the Gospel and throwing it into some vague fairy land future that your favorite theology school teaches?

Consider yourself rebuked for standing against a man of the Faith of Jesus Christ, King of Israel.

JM · Jul 7, 2015

Job8 said:
To call Dispensationalist teaching the "teaching of the devil" is not only insulting but downright ignorant. Please prove exactly how it is a teaching of the devil, or withdraw your ridiculous allegation.

It is astounding that there is such vitriolic opposition to a system of interpreting Scripture that is not only valid, but can be clearly supported by Scripture itself. But then truth is always bitterly opposed, and we see that in the lives of Christ and His apostles. I will challenge any anti-dispensationalist posting here to prove from Scripture that dispensational teaching is false doctrine.

Thank God most Dispensationalists do not take Dispensationalism to its logical conclusion or they would be teaching and believing heresy. For most Christians who accept the PreTrib Rapture form of eschatology they do so without applying the underlying hermeneutic, Dispensationalism, to the rest of their theology. Others like E. W. Bullinger demonstrate a clear and consistent Dispensational principle of “right division” and end up teaching heresy on a number of topics. Bullinger believed, consistently so, that only the Pauline Epistles were written for the church. Everything else was written for Israel. Others teach Hebrews and Revelation were written for the Nation of Israel after the rapture of the church and we shouldn’t apply them to the believers in this Dispensation…thus, water Baptism is not a Gospel ordinance.

Dispensationalists also believe that a Temple complete with sacrifices will be rebuilt in the (near) future. The passages used to support this view are taken from Ezekiel, the problem is, the passages clearly teach that these sacrifices would be offered for sin. This is heresy. Jesus Christ is the one and only sacrifice for sin typified in the OT sacrifices and it’s heresy to teach that we will return to types and shadows found in the former covenants.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Job8 · Jul 7, 2015

Winepress777 said:
I give testimony to you before God and man that I was dead in my sins before I received Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel is exactly what I am saying and I don't retract that for no man.

No Dispensationalist has ever denied or will ever deny that Jesus of Nazareth is indeed the Messiah and King of Israel. In fact He has been King of Israel since its inception, and will remain King of Israel for eternity. So if you think that that erroneous assumption is evidence you are categorically mistaken. Check out the writings of any Dispensationalist.

He is MY KING. The KING OF ISRAEL. Do I need to show you scriptures for that? Or are you going to continue ripping the heart out of the Gospel and throwing it into some vague fairy land future that your favorite theology school teaches?

Jesus presented Himself as the King of Israel to the nation of Israel at His first coming. At that time He was rejected, Jerusalem was destroyed, the Temple was destroyed, and the Jews went into worldwide dispersion. But He will indeed be the King of Israel literally, physically, and eternally after His Second Coming, when He gathers all the Jews from around the world and brings them to repentance and salvation. At that time He will personally redeem and restore the nation of Israel and there are hundreds of prophecies to support that.

But AT THIS VERY MOMENT the nation of Israel is NOT under King-Messiah Yeshua. They are a secular, Zionist state, still in unbelief, where the majority do not believe in a Messiah, and the Orthodox Jews are still waiting for their Messiah. So is there a vague "fairy land future" for Israel, or will God not fulfill His promises to Abraham -- that the land between the Nile and the Euphrates will be possessed by the twelve tribes of Israel, with David as their prince, and the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior and King? Study the Scriptures and learn how to rightly divide the Word of Truth.

Consider yourself rebuked for standing against a man of the Faith of Jesus Christ, King of Israel.

That fact that you forgot to mention that Jesus Christ is ALSO THE SAVIOR OF THE WORLD indicates that you need to stand rebuked for failing to acknowledge what God has said about His Son (1 Jn 4:14,15): And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

Job8 · Jul 7, 2015

JM said:
Dispensationalists also believe that a Temple complete with sacrifices will be rebuilt in the (near) future. The passages used to support this view are taken from Ezekiel, the problem is, the passages clearly teach that these sacrifices would be offered for sin. This is heresy. Jesus Christ is the one and only sacrifice for sin typified in the OT sacrifices and it’s heresy to teach that we will return to types and shadows found in the former covenants.

How can Scripture be heresy? That statement itself is heretical. Does Ezekiel reveal a Millennial Temple? Absolutely. Does Ezekiel show the redeemed and restored nation of Israel under Christ and God? Absolutely. Can we fathom why those sacrifices are re-instituted? Not necessarily. Some say that they are a memorialization of the one great sacrifice for Sin by the Lamb of God. But we are not told. What we do know is that Ezekiel is a revelation of the future nation of Israel under Christ and God. PLEASE NOTE CAREFULLY WHAT THE WORD OF GOD SAYS (Ezek 37:21-28 KJB):

21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: [REGATHERING OF THE JEWS]

22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all: [RESTORATION OF THE NATION]

23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God. [REDEMPTION OF THE JEWS]

24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. [DAVID TO BE KING UNDER CHRIST]

25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever. [FULFILLMENT OF ABRAHAMIC COVENANT, CONFIRMED TO BOTH ISAAC AND JACOB, TO REMAIN FOR ETERNITY IN THEIR LAND]

26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. [THE NEW COVENANT AN EVERLASTING COVENANT, AND GOD'S SANCTUARY IN THE MIDST OF ISRAEL]

27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. [GOD'S SANCTUARY = GOD'S TABERNACLE WITH ISRAEL]

28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore. [ISRAEL SANCTIFIED FOR ETERNITY]

Now if you can come up with another interpretation of the plain statements of Scripture, you can talk about "heresy". Otherwise the heresy is to DENY THE TRUTH OF GOD'S WORD. Or explain it away, or spiritualize it, or allegorize it, or give it some other fanciful meaning. And this is only a few verses. We could provide reams of Scripture to corrobarate this revelation.

JM · Jul 7, 2015

You are still waiting for Christ to come if that's how you understand the passage. This has been covered already. You are reading the passage as if it is acceptable to return to animal sacrifices that typified the shed blood of Christ. You act as if the old covenant is still binding when you known darn well God gave His people a better covenant made in Christ's blood. This was the WHOLE POINT of Hebrews.

Yours in the Lord

twin1954 · Jul 7, 2015

Job8 said:
How can Scripture be heresy? That statement itself is heretical. Does Ezekiel reveal a Millennial Temple? Absolutely. Does Ezekiel show the redeemed and restored nation of Israel under Christ and God? Absolutely. Can we fathom why those sacrifices are re-instituted? Not necessarily. Some say that they are a memorialization of the one great sacrifice for Sin by the Lamb of God. But we are not told. What we do know is that Ezekiel is a revelation of the future nation of Israel under Christ and God. PLEASE NOTE CAREFULLY WHAT THE WORD OF GOD SAYS (Ezek 37:21-28 KJB):

21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: [REGATHERING OF THE JEWS]

22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all: [RESTORATION OF THE NATION]

23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God. [REDEMPTION OF THE JEWS]

24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. [DAVID TO BE KING UNDER CHRIST]

25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever. [FULFILLMENT OF ABRAHAMIC COVENANT, CONFIRMED TO BOTH ISAAC AND JACOB, TO REMAIN FOR ETERNITY IN THEIR LAND]

26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. [THE NEW COVENANT AN EVERLASTING COVENANT, AND GOD'S SANCTUARY IN THE MIDST OF ISRAEL]

27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. [GOD'S SANCTUARY = GOD'S TABERNACLE WITH ISRAEL]

28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore. [ISRAEL SANCTIFIED FOR ETERNITY]

Now if you can come up with another interpretation of the plain statements of Scripture, you can talk about "heresy". Otherwise the heresy is to DENY THE TRUTH OF GOD'S WORD. Or explain it away, or spiritualize it, or allegorize it, or give it some other fanciful meaning. And this is only a few verses. We could provide reams of Scripture to corrobarate this revelation.

There are some real problems with this view. First to say that the sacrifices will be re-established as a memorial is to deny the only New Testament memorial of the death of Christ given us, the Lord's Supper. Moreover if the sacrifices are again to exist there would need to be a separate priesthood. That priesthood has been replaced by the Priesthood of Christ and the priesthood of all believers. This interpretation of Ezekiel is polar opposite to the teaching in Hebrews.

All of these passages can easily be applied to the true Israel of God, all those who are the true decendants of Abraham by faith.

And lastly the land promise was fulfilled in Joshua's day:
(Jos 23:14) And, behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the LORD your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, and not one thing hath failed thereof.

(Jos 23:15) Therefore it shall come to pass, that as all good things are come upon you, which the LORD your God promised you; so shall the LORD bring upon you all evil things, until he have destroyed you from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.

Job8 · Jul 7, 2015

JM said:
You are still waiting for Christ to come if that's how you understand the passage.

JM,
Scripture is very clear tha there are TWO advents or comings of Christ -- the first in humiliation (Isa 53:3) and the second "with power and great glory" (Mt 24:30). It is only at (and after) the second coming that Israel as a nation will be redeemed and restored (Rom 11:26-32).

You are reading the passage as if it is acceptable to return to animal sacrifices that typified the shed blood of Christ.

I am simply reading Ezekiel as all Scripture should be read -- in its plain literal sense (historical or prophetical) unless there is sufficient reason to see symbolism or metaphor.

There is no denying that the prophecy of Ezekiel appears to be at odds with the New Testament and the perfect finished work of Christ as the Lamb of God. But since it is Scripture, and since there are "some things hard to be understood" in Scripture, we must simply accept what it says without speculation. Only God can reveal the significance and necessity of the Millennial Temple, since from our perspective "it makes no sense".

You act as if the old covenant is still binding when you known darn well God gave His people a better covenant made in Christ's blood. This was the WHOLE POINT of Hebrews.

Not at all. When the veil in the Temple was torn in two, that brought an end to the Old Covenant. When Christ proclaimed "IT IS FINISHED" that ushered in the New Covenant or the New Testament in His blood, which is absolutely better than the Old. And Hebrews makes all this quite plain. At the same time we see in Ezekiel that not only is Israel redeemed and restored under the New Covenant, but the Temple is also there and the sacrifices are re-instituted. We dare not speculate, but we know that there are no contradictions with God or in Scripture, therefore God Himself must reconcile Ezekiel with Hebrews.

Job8 · Jul 7, 2015

twin1954 said:
There are some real problems with this view. First to say that the sacrifices will be re-established as a memorial is to deny the only New Testament memorial of the death of Christ given us, the Lord's Supper.

That is simply one interpretation. Ezekiel does not really explain the necessity of those animal sacrifices. In view of the epistle to the Hebrews they should not be revived. Yet they are there, and it is clear that Ezekiel is a revelation of a future Israel, since Israel has never experienced that which will remain eternal as noted in Ezekiel.

Moreover if the sacrifices are again to exist there would need to be a separate priesthood. That priesthood has been replaced by the Priesthood of Christ and the priesthood of all believers. This interpretation of Ezekiel is polar opposite to the teaching in Hebrews.

You will get no argument there. Hebrews tells us that the Levitical priesthood has been abolished. Yet Ezekiel tells us that it has been re-instituted. How do we reconcile these "polar opposites"? We simply do not have an answer, and we can only say that God has His reasons which are yet to be disclosed,

All of these passages can easily be applied to the true Israel of God, all those who are the true decendants of Abraham by faith.

Not really, unless you try to spiritualize away what is stated. "The land that I have given to my servant Jacob" is real land between the Nile (the river of Egypt) and the Euphrates , and Jacob is Israel. There is no way that this statement would apply to the Church, whose home is the New Jerusalem, the heavenly city with twelve foundations (Heb 12:22-24).

And lastly the land promise was fulfilled in Joshua's day:
(Jos 23:14) And, behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the LORD your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, and not one thing hath failed thereof.
(Jos 23:15) Therefore it shall come to pass, that as all good things are come upon you, which the LORD your God promised you; so shall the LORD bring upon you all evil things, until he have destroyed you from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.

We know from the history of Israel that this was merely a partial fulfilment, and your quotation from v 15 confirms that. Later on the ten tribes of the kingdom of Israel were sent into captivity and dispersed, following which the two tribes of the kingom of Judah went into Babylonian captivity. After their return, Israel was always under Gentile domination, and to this day Israel has not been restored to even a fraction of the Promised Land.

On the other hand, Ezekiel reveals Israel under God and Christ in full possession of all their land, and with the twelve tribes in eternal occupancy (Ezek 47:13,14): Thus saith the Lord GOD; This shall be the border, whereby ye shall inherit the land according to the twelve tribes of Israel: Joseph shall have two portions. And ye shall inherit it, one as well as another: concerning the which I lifted up mine hand to give it unto your fathers: and this land shall fall unto you for inheritance.

The distinguishing feature of Dispensationalism is that it recognizes that God has one plan for the Church (Jew and Gentile in one Body) and another plan for redeemed and restored Israel under the New Covenant. The reason there is no conflict is because the Church will live and reign with Christ in the New Jerusalem, whereas Israel will dwell on earth as the twelve tribes in full possession of their land. That is what God promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

twin1954 · Jul 8, 2015

Job8 said:
That is simply one interpretation. Ezekiel does not really explain the necessity of those animal sacrifices. In view of the epistle to the Hebrews they should not be revived. Yet they are there, and it is clear that Ezekiel is a revelation of a future Israel, since Israel has never experienced that which will remain eternal as noted in Ezekiel.

You will get no argument there. Hebrews tells us that the Levitical priesthood has been abolished. Yet Ezekiel tells us that it has been re-instituted. How do we reconcile these "polar opposites"? We simply do not have an answer, and we can only say that God has His reasons which are yet to be disclosed,

Not really, unless you try to spiritualize away what is stated. "The land that I have given to my servant Jacob" is real land between the Nile (the river of Egypt) and the Euphrates , and Jacob is Israel. There is no way that this statement would apply to the Church, whose home is the New Jerusalem, the heavenly city with twelve foundations (Heb 12:22-24).

We know from the history of Israel that this was merely a partial fulfilment, and your quotation from v 15 confirms that. Later on the ten tribes of the kingdom of Israel were sent into captivity and dispersed, following which the two tribes of the kingom of Judah went into Babylonian captivity. After their return, Israel was always under Gentile domination, and to this day Israel has not been restored to even a fraction of the Promised Land.

On the other hand, Ezekiel reveals Israel under God and Christ in full possession of all their land, and with the twelve tribes in eternal occupancy (Ezek 47:13,14): Thus saith the Lord GOD; This shall be the border, whereby ye shall inherit the land according to the twelve tribes of Israel: Joseph shall have two portions. And ye shall inherit it, one as well as another: concerning the which I lifted up mine hand to give it unto your fathers: and this land shall fall unto you for inheritance.

The distinguishing feature of Dispensationalism is that it recognizes that God has one plan for the Church (Jew and Gentile in one Body) and another plan for redeemed and restored Israel under the New Covenant. The reason there is no conflict is because the Church will live and reign with Christ in the New Jerusalem, whereas Israel will dwell on earth as the twelve tribes in full possession of their land. That is what God promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

So you are willing to abandon your woodenly literal interpretation when it suits you? ?Sad.

JM · Jul 8, 2015

Scripture is very clear tha there are TWO advents or comings of Christ -- the first in humiliation (Isa 53:3) and the second "with power and great glory" (Mt 24:30). It is only at (and after) the second coming that Israel as a nation will be redeemed and restored (Rom 11:26-32).

Brother, and I do mean this, Matthew 24 took place in 70AD. That was a revelation of Christ’s power against the nation of Israel covenanted with God through the Mosaic covenant…that was God’s divine wrath upon national Israel. Christ removed the central element of that covenant: The Temple. That covenant no longer exists nor will it be revived. The passage you alluded to in Romans 11 only explains that God will called a people to Himself from ethnic Israel, it does not say they are called to return to the old Mosaic covenant, but they will become believers in Christ. They will become Christians. The covenant referenced in Romans 11 was promised in Gen. 11, restated to Abraham and other places and fulfilled by Jesus Christ. What Dispensationalism does is try to enforce the Mosaic covenant of works upon ethnic descends of Israel as a covenant of salvation which is contrary to scripture.

I am simply reading Ezekiel as all Scripture should be read -- in its plain literal sense (historical or prophetical) unless there is sufficient reason to see symbolism or metaphor.

The sufficient reason is the death of Christ. Everything we read must be read with the life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ in mind. Your reading ignores the coming of Christ who is our all in all, the promised seed that would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3.15), in Christ we rest by faith (Hebrews 4). Not only for the Christian but the Jew. Christ alone!

There is no denying that the prophecy of Ezekiel appears to be at odds with the New Testament and the perfect finished work of Christ as the Lamb of God. But since it is Scripture, and since there are "some things hard to be understood" in Scripture, we must simply accept what it says without speculation. Only God can reveal the significance and necessity of the Millennial Temple, since from our perspective "it makes no sense".

Not at all. When the veil in the Temple was torn in two, that brought an end to the Old Covenant. When Christ proclaimed "IT IS FINISHED" that ushered in the New Covenant or the New Testament in His blood, which is absolutely better than the Old. And Hebrews makes all this quite plain. At the same time we see in Ezekiel that not only is Israel redeemed and restored under the New Covenant, but the Temple is also there and the sacrifices are re-instituted. We dare not speculate, but we know that there are no contradictions with God or in Scripture, therefore God Himself must reconcile Ezekiel with Hebrews.

Your view stands or falls on the false idea that Israel and the church are two separated, covenanted peoples of God. Paul who wrote, “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:”

Again, “But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.”

Hum. That throws a monkey wrench in your theology.

So, who are the “Jews” if one cannot be born a true Jew or ethnically Jewish under the new covenant of grace?

“And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

Ahh, there it is. If you are a believer in Christ YOU ARE Abraham’s seed. You are the true Israel of God and received the promises made to Abraham.

You believe God is going to save a people based on who their parents are and not based on Christ and faith in Him. You believe that a person can reject Jesus Christ, the New Testament and still be saved from their sin and penalty for it.

That's encouraging people in their rebellion against the true and living God.
You are claiming Jews can remain Jews without faith in Jesus Christ and still know God. That would mean their doctrine of God, even after being fully revealed to us in scripture, doesn't matter. They can deny the Son and have access to the Father based on a covenant that foreshadowed the coming of Christ. Religions that deny biblical Christology like Judaism are somehow in God's favour. Doubt it. The reason why Israel was favoured under the old covenant was due to the promise that Messiah would come from the physical line of Abraham. The idea of Israel being synonymous with the elect or the remnant of believers in Israel is too easy to demonstrate.

The Blood of the New Covenant was made in Christ's blood. Only those believing in Jesus Christ are in the New Covenant. The New Covenant was already made and Israel rejected their Messiah.

"For this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." Matthew 24

Christians all over the world use these words of institution at the Lord's Supper. The new covenant of grace was given to all, Israel first and Gentiles were included, and Israel wanted the covenant for them only believing that due to their mommy's and daddy's, ethnically speaking, they were to receive the covenant alone. Clearly, that didn't happen. Paul tells us we are not Jews outwardly but inwardly and that through believe we are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.

Unless...you have proof there will be another new covenant? A new, new covenant?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

JM · Jul 8, 2015

HOW THE WORDS OF JESUS WERE FULFILLED IN 70 A.D

(source)

Judea had always been one of the most restless and rebellious parts of the Roman Empire, and from 60 A.D. onwards the situation began to deteriorate rapidly. Felix the Roman governor was succeeded by Festus, Albinius and then Gessius Florus, a brutal tyrant whose cruelty and maladministration was bound to result in an uprising; which it soon did; Florus was driven out of Jerusalem, the fortress of Antonio was seized by the Zealots and the pro Roman faction in the Holy City was slaughtered. The revolt spread like wildfire, and when Cestius Gallus the Roman governor of Syria who had advanced on Jerusalem, suddenly retreated for no apparent reason, the Jewish Zealots went on the offensive, convinced that God was on their side.

However, over the next three years, under the command of Vespasian who subsequently became Roman Emperor, and then of his son Titus, the Imperial Legions systematically subdued Palestine, gradually tightening the net around the Holy City, in which anarchy reigned as rival Jewish groups fought each other for control. Gabara, Jotapata, Tarichaea, Gischala, and Gamala all fell to the Romans with great slaughter, as the defenders and citizens were exterminated or engaged in mass suicide. These events are recorded for us by the Jewish historian Josephus, who was at first a commander of the rebels in Galilee before going over to the Romans.

The account of the Siege of Jerusalem, as given by Josephus makes gruesome reading. Over one million Jews perished in the siege by famine and the sword. The defenders were reduced to eating human flesh, and chewing grass and leather for sustenance. Those who ventured outside the walls by night in search of food, if captured were scourged, then crucified by the Romans in full view of the defenders. Sometimes hundreds met their fate in this manner during the space of one day. Perhaps some recalled the words of Jesus, when making His way to Calvary and crucifixion. He said to the women of Jerusalem:-

“Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me but for yourselves and for your children.” Luke 23:28

Josephus writing of the conflict says:-

“Our city of all those which have been subjected to the Romans, was advanced to the highest felicity and was thrust down again to the extremist misery; for if the misfortunes of all men from the beginning of the world, were compared to those of the Jews, they would appear much inferior upon the comparison . . . to speak in brief, no other city every suffered such things, as no generation from the beginning of the world was ever more fruitful of wickedness.”

As the plight of those within the walls grew worse, many attempted to escape, swallowing their money so that it would not be taken by the Romans. When this was discovered, any subsequent deserters were ripped open and disemboweled by the Romans in search of gold. Eventually most of the city and the Castle of Antonio had fallen to the invaders, and the Jews took refuge within the Temple precincts. They prepared to make a final stand there, still believing that God would intervene and save them. Finally the Holy Temple fell to the soldiers of the Roman Prince Titus; fire brands were used by the Roman soldiers to set the Sanctuary ablaze, and soon the magnificent temple ot Herod was a heap of smoking ruins. The Roman Legions now carried their

standards, the Eagle and the Serpent into the Temple and sacrificed before them in the traditional Roman manner, an ox, a sheep and the ultimate abomination — a pig. It has been estimated that at least one milion perished in the Siege of Jerusalem, and some ninety thousand survivors were sold into slavery, whilst seven hundred of the tallest most handsome captives were reserved for the March of Triumph through Rome by ‘Titus and his Legions. Thus were fulfilled the predictions of the Lord Jesus, a generation earlier, and also of the prophet Daniel several hundred years before, when he had foretold concerning Titus and the armies of Imperial Rome:-

“And the people of the Prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined . . . and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.” Daniel 9:26-27

brinny · Jul 8, 2015

tall73 said:
Is Dispensationalism supported by the Bible.

What exactly is it?

Thank you kindly.

Dispensationalism

Newbie

Augsburg Catholic

Well-Known Member

Baptist by the Bible

Well-Known Member

Baptist by the Bible

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Augsburg Catholic

Senior Member

Senior Member

Augsburg Catholic

Baptist by the Bible

Senior Member

Senior Member

Baptist by the Bible

Augsburg Catholic

Augsburg Catholic

everlovin' shiner of light in dark places

Similar threads