MId-Acts: Two Gospels & Hebrews

[Danoh]

The following is from the Mid-Acts Perspective of Dispensationalism...

Reasons why Paul did not author Hebrews
By Raymond J. Keable, Part One​

The title of the book of Hebrews is our first clue regarding the authorship of this book and to whom it was written. The title alone teaches us that Paul could have not penned this epistle. There is not one verse in our Bible where God directs Paul to write exclusively to a certain group of people. Quite the contrary. Read the next 3 verses: Acts 9:15: “…But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel” and Acts 22:15: “For thou (Paul) shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard” and Acts 26:17: “Delivering thee from the people (the Hebrews), and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee.” Paul’s ministry and gospel is to everyone, never just to the Hebrews.

The first key to understanding that Paul did not pen the book of Hebrews is to understand that the words “Hebrew” and “Jew” carry different meanings. Anybody can become a Jew, but not everybody can become an Hebrew.

Scripturally, the word “Jew” is associated with the Law and the keeping of the Law...Judaism ( Act 26:5). Generally speaking, the word “Israel” is a reference to the land that God gave the nation of Israel. There is a reason for this…a reason which has a future fulfillment (as taught in Hebrews through Revelation). Read Isa.43:1: “But now saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine” and Isa.43:15: “I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.” When the Bible is not studied dispensationally, it causes many to spiritualize (to convert from literal to spiritual) the nation of Israel, the kingdom promised that nation, and sometimes the people themselves. Why? It is because they want to be a part of the only nation created by God for Himself. This errant doctrine is not taught in scripture. One does not have to be part of a nation (spiritual or otherwise) to get the blessings of the Lord today. Israel is the Bible’s prime example of a nation that had it all but lost it because they tried to maintain their own righteousness through the works of their flesh…the law!

Scripture defines the word “Hebrew” as a fleshly descendant of Abraham. The Apostle Paul highlights the difference in meaning between the words Jew and Hebrew. Rom.9:3: “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen ACCORDING TO THE FLESH.” Rom.11:1: “I say then, Hath God cast away his people: God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, OF THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, of the tribe of Benjamin.” From this verse we can see that an Israelite is the same thing as an Hebrew…a fleshly descendant of Abraham. Jacob was a fleshly descendant of Abraham whom God re-named Israel. (Gen.32:28) The difference in the two words, I believe, highlights the fact that God promised the land of Israel to Abraham’s “fleshly” descendants...the Hebrews. Paul continues showing this difference when he described himself in Phil.3:5: “Circumcised the eighth day, OF THE STOCK OF ISRAEL, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews…” Notice Paul does not say “a Jew of the Jews.” Paul’s most defining verse regarding this distinction is found in 2Cor.11:22: “Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the SEED OF ABRAHAM? so am I.” Paul is talking about his ethnic origin, from which no one can be separated. Did you notice once again that Paul did not use the word Jew? Not only did Paul (as we will see) consider himself to be a Jew (part of Israel’s religion), an Israelite (belonging to the land), he was also an Hebrew (according to the flesh). Jesus Himself acknowledges this fleshly, genealogical pedigree…but not in a very flattering way. He tells Israel’s leaders in John 8:33-44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do…”

Many use Luke17:20,21 to prove a spiritual kingdom/nation (disproving this teaching will also disprove the notion of a “spiritual Jew”). They say this passage teaches that the kingdom of God is spiritual in nature and that it resides in believing hearts. But these verses do not teach this. The hrase “within you” means “in the midst of.” Jesus Christ was in the midst of the nation of Israel (Joel 2:27; Zeph.3:5; Zech.2:5; Jn.1:11,31; 20:19,26 ). He was the representation and manifestation of the kingdom promised that nation. If they (as a nation/commonwealth) had believed that He was their Messiah, the kingdom would have come as previously prophesied (Isa.2:1-5). In Luke 17:20,21, Jesus is talking to the Pharisees. An earlier passage in Luke 7:30 states: “But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.” Do you actually think this so-called “spiritual kingdom of God” would reside in the hearts of the very people who rejected God’s counsel? If this were a spiritual kingdom, why would the Lord teach the Jews to pray for a physical, earthly kingdom in Mat.6:9,10: “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.” Why can we read of “…that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God” in Rev.21:2,3,9,10? Why do Psa.48:2 and Mat.5:35 speak of the “city of the great king”? In Luke 19:41, did Jesus Christ weep over a “spiritual” city? What about the Lord’s promise to Abram of a physical piece of identifiable real estate? Gen.17:8: “And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the LAND wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an EVERLASTING POSSESSION…” This sounds very literal to me!

End Part One

 

[Danoh]

Reasons why Paul did not author Hebrews
By Raymond J. Keable, Part Two​

Some will say that the word “Jew” refers to the descendants of the tribe of Judah. But what does scripture say? Paul calls himself a Jew in Acts 26:39: “But Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus…” but in Rom.11:1 and Phil. 3:5 he specifically states that he is from the tribe of Benjamin…not Judah. Read Gal.1:15: “But when it pleased God who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace.” Paul is introduced into scripture as an adult…never as a child! Separation from his “mother’s womb” is a reference to God separating Paul from the religious teachings of his nation. Tarsus, the birthplace of Paul (Acts 21:39; 22:3), was not a city in Israel. It was in Cilicia (a province of southeast Asia Minor…modern day Turkey). So, not only did Paul identify himself with the nation of Israel, he was also part of that nation’s religion…Judaism. After his conversion on the road to Damascus, Paul was at odds with the religious leaders of Israel regarding the so-called “righteousness of the law” (Acts 13:38,39).

There have been many converts to Judaism (to become Jews), but no one can make themselves a fleshly descendant of Abraham. One example of this would be in the book of Esther. Esther recounts the fate of those Jews who stayed in foreign lands after the captivity and dispersion of 70 years…contrary to what God wanted. It shows that even though they did not go back to their promised land, God still protected His people. Why? Because He made some promises to them (Eph.2:12). He will keep them! Esther 8:17 says: “And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king’s commandment and his decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a good day. And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them.” Notice that this passage does not say they became Hebrews or Israelites. Some of the Gentiles in that land realized that Israel’s God was the true God of the universe and as such wanted to become part of that “nation.”

This errant, religious tendency to spiritualize causes many to believe God will not literally fulfill His promises made to that nation. Two passages should be sufficient to prove these promises will be fulfilled. Rom.11:26,27: “And so all Israel shall be saved: AS IT IS WRITTEN, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.” (see also Deut.30:3; Isa.59:20,21; Isa.27:9; Jer.31:31-37; Heb.8:8; 10:16). 2Pet.3:9 says: “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness…” If you do not believe the Lord will literally, visibly, and physically fulfill His “covenants of promise” (Eph.2:12) made to that nation (Rom.9:4), then you are calling God a “slacker.” In essence, you are calling God a liar! Paul deals with this issue head-on in Rom. 3:3,4: “For what if some did not believe: shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written…” These things are written down! If you do not believe them, what does that make you?

As mentioned earlier, the word “Jew” is also associated with the religion God gave the nation of Israel…Judaism. This religion is called the Law. Paul says in Acts 26:4,5: “My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews; Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straightest sect of OUR RELIGION I lived a Pharisee.” The word “OUR” is a plural, possessive pronoun meaning: of or pertaining to us; belonging to us. This religion belonged to Israel. A convert to Judaism is called a “proselyte.” Proselyte defined means: “an arriver from a foreign region.” Simply put, it is a Gentile who desires to practice the law given that nation. What did the Lord think of this? Mat.23:15: “Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” Why did the Lord say this? Because the law (as it developed from the Old Testament [Deut.31:24-29; Mal.2:7-9]) was misunderstood, changed, and deified by Israel’s religious leaders. Mark 7:7,13: “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men…Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.” Essentially, the law blinded the minds of the religious Jews to the reality of Jesus Christ! 2Cor.3:14: “But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ.” This is why Christianity is NOT a religion!

The word “religion” is used five times in our Bible (the KJV). Scripture does not promote religion. The word religion means to “bind again…to return to bondage.” The first four times the word is used is very revealing. Scripture calls it “the Jews religion.” With this religion (the law), scripture teaches that Paul “persecuted the church of God”…wasted it, profited in it, was exceedingly zealous of the traditions of his fathers, and could not bridle his tongue but deceived his own heart” (Acts 26:5, Gal.1:13,14; and Jas.1:26). The only religion God ever gave was the Law and it was given to Israel. Why? Gal.3:19: “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions…” and Rom.3:20: “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Do you know what this means with regard to people who want to become Jews…or who think they are “spiritual Israel”? They have gone backwards into blindness…into a system that could never bring righteousness. Gal.3:3: “Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” Gal.4:9: “But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?”

After his salvation, Paul knew about this, taught about this, wrote about this, and suffered tremendously because he upheld this “heavenly revealed” truth (Gal.1:11,12). He knew that his gospel, “…the gospel of the grace of God…” (Acts 20:24), was the only gospel that could save anyone…especially his fleshly brethren…the Israelites. Romans 10:1-3: “Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.” Law keepers are those who “establish their own righteousness.”

End Part Two

 

[Danoh]

Reasons why Paul did not author Hebrews
By Raymond J. Keable, Part Three​

Paul’s epistles speak against religion…that bondage. Gal.2:3,4: “But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage.” Paul’s epistles speak against the “righteousness of the law.” Rom.10:4: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” Paul’s epistles speak against the spiritual advantage of any one ethnic group. 1Cor.12:13: “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.” Take care to notice once again that Paul does NOT say there is no difference between an Hebrew or a Gentile. He says Jew or Gentile. God’s focus today is not on any particular race. Rather, God’s focus in today’s dispensation is on the foolishness of thinking the law can make one righteous versus the righteousness which comes by the grace of God…which is a free gift given to all who have trusted in the sufficiency of the cross. Gal.3:2,3: “This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish: having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?”

Paul, as God’s chosen vessel for today (Acts 9:15), knew that his ministry was to preach against the “Jew’s religion.” He says in Acts 13:39: “And by him (Jesus Christ) all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” and Gal.5:4: “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” Paul was taught that God is not dealing exclusively with the “Hebrews” in the dispensation of grace. Rom.2:11: “For there is no respect of persons with God.” Peter, after the salvation of Paul, began to learn this also. Acts 10:28: “ And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another NATION; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.”

This is why we can read phrases such as: “the LORD God of the Hebrews” and “the God of the Hebrews” several times in our Bible…but not once in Paul’s epistles. The closest we come to this in Paul’s writings is found in Rom.3:29: “Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.” The phrase “God of the Jews (not God of the Hebrews) refers right back to the law…to the religion God gave Israel. This is why God separated Paul… to preach a new gospel. Religion binds you…grace sets you free! Gal.5:1: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again WITH THE YOKE OF BONDAGE.”

The clearest truth taught by dispensational Bible study is that we are living in a time period called the “dispensation of grace” (Eph.3:2). This dispensation continually contrasts the fleshly works of the law with something much better. Gal.2:21 makes it clear: “I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.” Rom.6:14,17 make it even clearer: “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace … But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.” The “servants of sin” are the keepers of the Law! But Gal.5:14 is the best: “For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”

These traditional, religious, but errant fabrications (a spiritual kingdom and the righteousness of keeping the law) have blinded the hearts and minds of many. It takes away security in “once saved always saved” as taught by the Apostle Paul. The first passage usually shown by these unbelievers to prove their false belief is Heb.6:4-6.

“Jew” is not an ethnic group of people. “Hebrew” is an ethnic group of people. Therefore, the very title of the book, Hebrews, automatically teaches us that this book heads a section of the Bible written to a specific, identifiable ethnic group of people. Since God is not dealing exclusively with the Hebrews today and since He has not yet fulfilled all His promises to them, this book is obviously for the so-named group of people in a future time period. “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written…” (Rom.11:26,27).

End Part Three

 

[Danoh]

Reasons why Paul did not author Hebrews
By Raymond J. Keable, Part Four

The following points are more doctrinal reasons to prove that Paul did not author the book of Hebrews. There could be many more listed than what I have here, but I hope this limited list will convince you…or at the very least cause you to rethink what you have been taught regarding Paul’s authorship of Hebrews.

1. Scofield said: “The epistle of Paul to the Hebrews.” This was not in the original translation.

2. 2Thes.3:17 says: “The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle: so I write.” Do you see Paul’s token in the book of Hebrews? This verse alone should be enough to convince everyone that Paul did not author Hebrews.

3. All 13 of Paul’s epistles begin with his name…the very first word! Hebrews does not. Is there a difference?

4. The reason why the first word in Hebrews is GOD instead of Paul is because Jesus Christ speaks to Israel in her future, prophesied tribulation time period as the verses indicate (Heb.12:25; Psa.2:5; 50:1-7). This is Jehovah speaking to Israel to fulfill the promises He made to that nation. Today, according to what Paul says, God is silent from heaven. It is not because He is not capable of this (speaking from heaven). It is because He chooses not to manifest Himself that way today. We walk by faith in His word only (Rom.8:24,25; 2Cor.4:18). We have a completed Bible. God’s intervention today is partially exemplified through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (which we cannot see or hear) and fully realized through His word working effectually in those that believe (1Thes.2:13). This is why Paul says in 1Tim.4:10: “For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.”

5. Heb.1:2: Are you and I in these last days? No! These “last days” started in Acts 2…at Pentecost (Acts2:17). This was exclusively for the nation of Israel as the verses state (Acts 2:22,36; etc.). Israel’s “last days” await future fulfillment.

6. In Heb.2:3, the author regards himself as one whose knowledge of Christ was second-hand. By contrast, Paul vehemently declares that his apostleship and message were DIRECTLY from the Lord (Gal.1:11,12).

7. Heb.2:3: the “first” salvation preached was the “gospel of the kingdom” (Mat.3:2; 4:17; etc.), not “the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24). This was preached to Israel, not to the Gentile world.

8. Heb.2:4 is OBVIOUSLY referring to the early Acts period. “Them” is plural. This would be the 12 in early Acts…the Messianic circumcision apostles. You can read about Peter, Stephen, and Philip in Acts 2,6,8 performing miracles. Then you can read Acts 19:11: “And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul.” This is singular proving that Heb.2:4 cannot be referring to Paul.
9. Heb.2:4 (once again) is an OBVIOUS reference to Pentecost (Acts 2). This was before Paul was saved. Also, signs are for the nation of Israel (1Cor.1:22; Psa.74:9; Isa.8:18). Why would Paul write about signs in one part of the Bible and then say in another place that today “we walk by faith and not by sight” (2Cor.5:7)? In the beginning of his ministry, Paul was enabled to do some miracles. Why? To provoke Israel to emulation (Rom.11:14; 1Cor.14:22). Later in his ministry he lost the ability to do these things. The reason for this is what God revealed to him in 2Cor.12:9: “…my grace is sufficient for thee…” We have a completed Bible! We have the knowledge of what God’s grace has given us…eternal life in a resurrected body…a home eternal in the heavens…a promise from God (Titus1:2). If you need something “visual” to prove God’s love for you (something other that His Word), then my friend, you will never have any real internal peace (Rom.5:1).

10. In Heb.2:6, look at the phrase “son of man.” This is a “prophetic” title for the Lord Jesus Christ (which means it is the subject of prophecy) and it is never once used in Paul’s epistles. It is a title referring to future judgment…for the nation of Israel. Luke 21:36: Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.” It is used in the Old Testament and the gospels…then it skips Paul’s epistles and jumps right over to Hebrews. Paul preaches something called the “mystery”…not prophecy (Rom.1:16; Eph.3:9).

11. Paul’s epistles transition from the old covenant to the dispensation of grace and the church, the Body of Christ. This transition is seen in the book of Acts (where Paul wrote 6 of his 13 epistles). Hebrews transitions from the old covenant to the new covenant…for Israel (Heb.8:8-13; 10:16). Hebrews 8:8ff is a restatement of Jer.31:31-34…which was written to and about the nation of Israel. Hebrews never says that we are moving out of Israel’s program into the Body program…into a different dispensation! It talks about the “things to come” mentioned in Col.2:17. This doctrinal understanding also fits with what Paul taught in Rom.11:25-29.

12. Compare Heb.9:28 and Mat.20:28 with 1Tim.2:4,6 and Tit.2:11. One says salvation for “many” and one says salvation for “all.” Is there a difference? Be honest with yourself! In “time past” (Eph.2:11), salvation was supposed to go to Israel first (Acts 3:24-26. “Unto you first…&#8221. It is only when you compare Paul’s letters where we can read about salvation for all…not to Israel first. That “middle wall of partition between us” (circumcision and uncircumcision) has come down (Eph.2:11-16). Why? Because of the “spiritual fall” of the nation of Israel (Acts 7:51-60).

13. Heb.2:17 talks about God making reconciliation for the “sins of the people.” This is a clear reference to the people of Israel (Mat.1:21; Amos 3:1,2; Ex.32:34; etc.). There is a particular body of sins that pertain only to the nation of Israel. This goes all the way back to Ex.19:5,6…a book written to that nation (Psa.106:24,25; Isa.1:4; Jer.3:25; 22:1,8,9; 31:32). Paul says in Rom.3:23: “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” His gospel makes no distinction between any nation or ethnic group or even any sin. We are not under any covenant today…we are under grace (Tit.2:11).

End Part Four

 

[Danoh]

Reasons why Paul did not author Hebrews
By Raymond J. Keable, Part Five

14. Heb.13:13: This is a key verse in Hebrews. In fact, the whole book is summed up in this verse: do not go back into temptation…back into Judaism…the old covenant (Heb.11:26; 12:3; 1Pet.4:4,14-16). They (the Hebrews) had the only true religion (Judaism) for over 1500 years. Heb.13:13 ties back into Heb. 6:1,2. The foundation talked about in this passage is the foundation found in the gospels (the law), where “perfection” could not be found. Now (in the future time period that Hebrews is talking about) perfection can be found…associated with the priesthood of Jesus Christ (not revealed in the gospels…Heb.7:11). Hebrews is the final call for believing Jews to come out of the camp of Judaism and to bear the reproach of Christ. Heb.13:13 also ties into Rev.2:7,10,11,17; etc., where it talks about those who “overcometh” and being “faithful unto death.” Paul never says we have to be “faithful unto death.” Paul never trains anybody to go through this tribulation time period. In Heb.13:13, “without the camp” is an obvious reference to Israel (Ex.19:16; 32:26,27; 33:7). The word “camp” is never found in Paul’s epistles.

15. Hebrews teaches do not be afraid of something new (Heb.10:20-22, 1-4,14,18), and all the symbols are realities. Do not run back to the shadows (Heb.8:1-5,12,13). In John 4:19-24, all the old shadows (Judaism) are put away with the blood. If you read these verses carefully, they are obviously about Jews and things pertaining exclusively to them. Paul mentions this future time period in Col.2:16,17: “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” The book of Hebrews talks about this time period. Those shadows…meat, drink, holyday, new moon, and Sabbath days are practices of the old Mosaic covenant…under the Aaronic priesthood. Hebrews warns against going back to that because there is no “perfection” to be found under that system.

16. Theme of Hebrews: “Jesus Christ, the new and living way…the better way.” (Heb.10:20) What better way? 1. Heb.1-7: “Jesus Christ…the better priesthood.” 2. Heb.8-10: “Jesus Christ…the better sacrifice.” 3. Heb.11-13: “Jesus Christ…the better substance of faith.” Paul NEVER talks about the priesthood of Jesus Christ. The words priest, priests, and priesthood are never found in Paul’s epistles. The last time “priesthood” is used in the O.T. is Neh.13:29. The next time it is used is in Heb.7:5. The “priesthood” has to do with Israel’s Messiah. When Heb.7: 17 says: “…Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec,” this is a quote from Psa.110:4…written by David…showing God the Father talking to God the Son (Psa.110:1; Acts 2:34; Heb.1:3; 10:12,13; 12:2). Where was David ever told to write to the Gentiles?

17. Hebrews warns of severe consequences: Heb.6:4-6; 10:26,27,29,34-39. “Perdition,” in Heb. 10:39, is another word for spiritual damnation. In light of this, the Hebrews are told to do two things in that time period: 1. Endure. 2. Have patience (Heb.3:6,14; 6:11,12,15; 10:36). This endurance and patience pertains to their belief and witness for the Lord Jesus Christ. If they do not maintain their witness, they will not be saved! Contrariwise, Paul says that once we are saved we are “sealed unto the day of redemption” (Eph.4:30). Even if we deny Christ (after salvation), the Lord cannot deny himself because He abides faithful (2Tim.2:13). Paul says that if our works are no good, we will suffer loss, but we will still be saved (1Cor.3:14,15). The “consequences” we suffer in today’s dispensation are found in Gal. 6:7,8 and 2Tim.3:12. They have absolutely nothing to do with losing our salvation. This (the gospel of the grace of God) is not cheap grace as some have told me. It is a “free gift,” unconditional (God will not take it back). There was nothing cheap about what Christ accomplished on the cross. We have the honor, privilege, and opportunity to preach this today (1Cor.1:18; 2Cor.5:20).

18. There is a 3-fold warning in Hebrews: 1. Not to fall away. 2. Not to sin willfully. 3. Not to draw back. Does Paul give us this 3-fold warning? No! Paul tells us to “stand fast” in the liberty we have been given (Gal.5:1)…he says that “sin shall not have dominion over you” (Rom.6:14)…and he tells us that we “are sealed unto the day of redemption” (Eph.4:30). He NEVER tells us that we can “draw back unto perdition.” This would negate everything that Paul taught with regard to our security in Christ. We do not need to manifest our faith by our works today. Rom.11:6 says: “And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more of grace: otherwise work is no more work.” In the book of James (2:14,24), it is different…as in all the Hebrew epistles. Certainly God desires good works from us today (Eph.2:10), but they are not a prerequisite for salvation. Jas.1:27 shows the works that have to be done in that time period: “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” In that time period, any Jew who does not help their afflicted brethren and who gets the mark of the beast will not be saved. Their name will be taken out of the book of life. The people who do not get the mark will suffer terribly. This is how God will separate the true Israel from the false Israel…the wheat from the tares (false grain). We have all heard the phrase: “talk is cheap.” The faithful Jew in that time period will not become part of the anti-christ’s political and economic system by getting the mark of the beast! The Gentiles in that time period will also be judged based on their treatment of the Jews that need help…the ones that have not received the mark of the beast (Mat.25:31-46). This is the only place in the Bible where Gentiles are referred to as sheep. The “sheep” nations will be the ones helping the believing remnant of the Israel in that future, prophesied time of wrath.

19. What is the good news in Hebrews? Heb.9:10,15,28…salvation is future…it is coming (Acts 3:19-21). Hebrews encourages the people in that time period to patiently endure to the end. With Paul and the gospel of grace, salvation is instantaneous the moment a person believes (Rom.4:5; Eph.2:8,9; Titus 3:5). Why would God have Paul preach two different messages? If you compare Jn.14:17 with Jn.20:22 you will see that it took the circumcision apostles over three years to receive the “indwelling” of the Holy Spirit. They received it after the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ…after they were tried and tested during the Lord’s earthly ministry. One of them did not make it because he was not true in heart. Today, the moment a person believes, he is automatically and instantaneously indwelled by God the Holy Spirit. This is a MAJOR DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCE!

End Part Five

 

[Danoh]

Reasons why Paul did not author Hebrews
By Raymond J. Keable, Part Six


20. Heb.10:26: “For if we sin willfully…” The writer of Hebrews is talking as if he is facing the mark of the beast…in that time of wrath. This is the “sin unto death” (1Jn.5:16; Jas.1:27). This was written to the 12 scattered tribes of Israel (Jas.1:1). This COULD NOT BE PAUL! Paul says that we are saved from that prophesied time of wrath (1Thes.1:10:10; 5:9). The only “sin unto death” today is to die unsaved! That means not having trusted in the completed cross-work of the Lord Jesus Christ for the payment of your sins.

21. Salvation for the nation of Israel (corporately), is not a present possession (Rom.11:26,27; Heb.9:12,15). It will come at the 2nd coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. As mentioned before, Hebrews has the same concept of future salvation (Heb.4:6-8). If Israel had entered into their rest under Joshua (they entered the land but not into the rest), then later on David would not be talking about the day still coming. Today, in Paul’s epistles, everybody (Jew or Gentile) is saved individually and then becomes part of a new corporate identity…the church, the body of Christ. This is a brand new creation of God (2Cor.5:17) with Paul being the first member.

22. There are two rests in Hebrews: 1. In the cross (Heb.4:1)…give up your works…come to God. 2. the millennium (Isa.14:3; 32:18…called the rest in the O.T.). That is why Jesus Christ and Joshua have the same name. Joshua brought Israel into the promised land. They chose not to hearken to the Lord. Eventually, as promised and prophesied, they were driven out of the land (James1:1). The millennial kingdom rest for Israel is on the earth…in the land where Joshua brought them (Rev.20:4,6). We (the church, the body of Christ), will be in the “heavenly kingdom’ (2Tim.4:18) and our rest is “in Christ” RIGHT NOW…because not only are we are complete “in Him” (Col.2:10), but we have been “made the righteousness of God in Christ” (2Cor.5:21). The Lord says to Paul: “…my grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of God may REST upon me.” (2 Cor.12:9). Rom.5:1: “…we have peace with God…”

23. Salvation in the book of Hebrews is different from us. The Jews in that time period think in accordance with covenant promises. Their concept of salvation is enduring and maintaining…in order to receive God’s “covenanted promises.” Our concept of salvation is simply that we are LOST…in need of a Saviour for our sins. This is why Paul tells us that the covenants were given to Israel only (Rom.9:4; Eph.2:12). In doing this, he makes a distinction between his writings and the person who penned Hebrews. This is one of the biggest problems you will have in witnessing to Jews. They view themselves as sinners, but not lost.

24. Some people teach that the book of Hebrews is where Paul addresses the Hebrew people. This cannot be true because a different message (different from Paul’s) is taught in this book. It most certainly is not salvation by grace through faith alone. There is not one verse in the Bible where God instructs Paul to write two different messages. The “gospel of the grace of God” (Acts20:24) is clearly NOT taught in Hebrews.

25. In Romans 9,10, and 11, Paul explains God’s present program with regard to Israel’s position and status today. There is no difference between Israel and the nations today because that “middle wall of partition” (Eph.2:13-15) has come down. Do you know what this means? Everything God wanted Israel to know in the present dispensation is found in Paul’s epistles…especially in Romans. 2Pet.3:15,16 is NOT referring to the book of Hebrews as some believe.

26. Hebrews does not explain the postponement is Israel’s program. Paul’s message does! It has been almost 2000 years since God stopped dealing separately with Israel. Hebrews explains the future, prophesied trouble for that nation. Paul would never say: “For our God is a consuming fire” (Heb.12:29). Paul speaks of “withheld” wrath and the “longsuffering” of God today. Why would Paul write “grace and peace” in 13 epistles (to everybody) in one part of the Bible and then write the opposite (wrath) to the Hebrews in another part? Again, where is the scriptural proof that Paul was told to write two different messages to two different groups of people for two different time periods?

27. Hebrews, written to the Hebrew believers (in Christ), prophesies persecution and it warns them “do not flee from Christ.” In Rom.16:7 and Rom.15:20 Paul makes a distinction between God’s two programs…there were those “in Christ” before Paul (with another message). This could only be referring to Israel with the “gospel of the kingdom.” The “gospel of the kingdom” is another foundation. In Rom.15:20, Paul states very clearly that he would not “build upon another man’s foundation.” The Holy Ghost (in the Acts period) forbade Paul from preaching in the same region as Peter (Compare Acts 16:6,7; 1Pet.1:1). This is a verse where God tells Paul NOT to write to the Hebrews about the future fulfillment of the promises God made to that nation. This was the job of the authors of the Hebrew epistles.

28. Because there is Pauline truth in Hebrews (about the cross), people assume Paul wrote this epistle. The book of Hebrews was written in light of the truth’s revealed to Paul. Gal.2:2: “And I went up by revelation and communicated to them THAT GOSPEL which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run in vain.” Hebrews is a book of exhortation designed to motivate (Heb.13:12-21). Hebrews explains the cross to Israel in her future time of trouble/purging while Romans explains the cross to EVERYBODY today. This time of wrath you read about in the Hebrew epistles was prophesied in the O.T. (Jer.30:7; Daniel 9:20-27; etc.). The things Paul wrote were a “mystery,” not revealed until after God saved Saul/Paul on the road to Damascus (Acts 9 ).

29. In Hebrews, you get the sense that the book is written to the Jews in their homeland…not scattered (Heb. 13:10-14). The altar/temple is located in the homeland (Israel) and Hebrews is warning them not to be tempted into or partakers of the sacrificial temple worship. So, it makes sense that Hebrews is written to the Jews of Acts 20:21. Hebrews is telling them to leave those things! Paul uses the word “altar” 3 times and “temple” 11 times. It is NEVER in reference to what is being conveyed in Hebrews! By way of contrast, Paul says that we ourselves are the “temple of God” and that the Spirit of God dwells in us (1Cor.3:16,17). We met together at a building for edification and fellowship. Our building is NOT an altar or temple. The ultimate sacrifice has already been made (Col.2:14).

30. Heb. 13:23 is used to prove Paul penned Hebrews. This is reading something into the verse that is not there. Writing from Italy, we know Paul is in bonds in Rome and that only Luke is with him (2Tim. 4:11). Then Paul wrote in 2Tim. 4:21 for Timothy to come before winter. So the writer of Hebrews is saying: “When Timothy comes, I’ll come and visit you.” The writer of Hebrews is saying that when Timothy (who was set at liberty) comes and relieves him (possibly Luke), he is free to go visit them (the Hebrews). This cannot be Paul since he was a prisoner in Rome. Luke was Paul’s traveling companion and he was probably with Paul during his two year house imprisonment in Rome. So quite possibly it could be Timothy coming to relieve Luke so that Luke could go visit the Jews in Jerusalem.

End Part Six

 

[Danoh]

Reasons why Paul did not author Hebrews
By Raymond J. Keable, Part Seven [Final]

31. In Hebrews, salvation for the nation is NOT secure (Heb. 6:4-6, etc.). But keep in mind, the warning of Heb. 6:4-6 is directed to the entire nation as a whole. It is a “national” issue! It does not serve as a warning to the believing remnant which possess and cannot lose eternal life (1 Jn. 3:1,2; 4:13-19; 5:1, 11-13, 18). During the 7 year tribulation, there will be a great apostasy that will seduce many into believing the damnable heresy that Jesus Christ was not their Messiah nor the propitiation for their sins at His first coming (1Jn. 4:1-5). Read 2Thes. 2:11, 12. These apostates were never part of the believing remnant: 1 Jn. 2:19: “They went out from us, but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” They never possessed eternal life. Those falling away in Heb. 6:6 are not part of the believing Jewish remnant. They are outside the truth concerning the Lord Jesus Christ in spite of the past historical testimony/record of God’s goodness to the nation. Put in other words: they never had it to begin with. That is why in the book of 1 John you find a series of seven tests to weed out the true from the false ... the possessors from the professors. In Paul’s epistles, our salvation is secure apart from any works. Rom. 4:5: “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” You do not find any kind of a test as to whether or not you are saved. This is salvation ... NOT probation. Sadly, most of the people I talk to want “probation,” not “salvation.” We are adult sons, no longer under tutors and governors and God expects (not requires) us to act accordingly. This means understanding our security!

32. Hebrews 7:11,12 says that that the law and the priesthood are NOT done away ... rather ... they are changed. “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?” This is completely different from Paul’s writings. As I mentioned earlier, Paul never mentions priesthood. He says nothing about “us” receiving the law. He says nothing about the law being changed. He simply says that the law has been done away with (as a system of righteousness for this dispensation). Grace is the operative word today and action ... not law.

33. The book of Hebrews picks up where Acts left off ... for Israel. It starts to explain the interim between the 1st and 2nd coming and the things promised to that nation (now with the knowledge of the cross). Heb. 7:19 says: “For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.” The law is basically broken into three sections: 1. Moral law (the Ten Commandments); 2. Civil law – statutes and judgments (daily living rules); 3. Ceremonial law – Levitical sacrifices (animals as a way to atone for sin). In the time of “Jacob’s trouble” (Jer. 30:7), the anti-christ reinstitutes the old Mosaic sacrifices – the ceremonial law. In the Bible, this is called the abomination of desolation (Mat. 24:15). We know that the law was a temporary covenant added because of the transgressions of Israel. As mentioned, it was not one of the “covenants of Promise.” By reinstituting the old Mosaic, Levitical, animal sacrifices, the anti-christ is teaching the unfaithful to do exactly opposite what the Lord has told them to do. Heb. 10:11,12 says: “And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can NEVER take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God.” Hebrews tries to teach the nation that Christ was the final sacrifice. Paul NEVER mentions the need for animal sacrifices – that was for Israel in time-past. That is the subject of prophecy. Paul preaches the mystery.

34. In 2 Tim. 2:15, God tells each and every one of us to study His Word. Rom. 11:15 talks of “the reconciling of the world” (Rom. 11:15). You do not see this in Hebrews. As a student of scripture, did you ever ask yourself why? The “reconciliation of the world” and the “ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18,19) is exclusive to this present dispensation. God’s purpose in the Hebrew epistles is to reconcile His nation – the Hebrews – not the world (Rom. 11:16; Isa. 45:17; Hos. 3:5; Amos 9:14,15). This is another major “doctrinal” difference!

35. Acts 9:15: “But the Lord said unto him (Ananias), Go thy way: for he (Saul/Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.” Paul’s ministry was clearly unlimited in scope. The book of Hebrews, by its title, is written to the Hebrews. If Paul preached just to one group of people (which is what you see in Hebrews), Paul would be breaking God’s admonition in Acts 9:15 to go to everybody – Jew and Gentile alike.

End Part Seven [Final]

 

[RDKirk]

Isn't this a violation of Raymond J. Keable's copyright? This should be linked to his web page.

Otherwise, I have always voted for Apollos as the author of Hebrews anyway.

 

[Danoh]

Isn't this a violation of Raymond J. Keable's copyright? This should be linked to his web page.

Otherwise, I have always voted for Apollos as the author of Hebrews anyway.

An oversight on my part - thanks - here it is:

Ray Keable

Actually, though I agree with Ray on the above, I was more focused on all the background information leading up to his thoughts on Hebrews more than on his conclusion about its authorship itself - good, solid, Mid-Acts background material.

Again, thanks, for catching that

 

[BABerean2]

An oversight on my part - thanks - here it is:

Ray Keable

Actually, though I agree with Ray on the above, I was more focused on all the background information leading up to his thoughts on Hebrews more than on his conclusion about its authorship itself - good, solid, Mid-Acts background material.

Again, thanks, for catching that

While you are making corrections, you also forgot to give credit to Lacunza, Irving, and Darby for the origin of your doctrine.




PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418



Genesis of Dispensational Theology (on YouTube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee4RS5pDntQ


.

 

[Danoh]

While you are making corrections, you also forgot to give credit to Lacunza, Irving, and Darby for the origin of your doctrine.




PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418



Genesis of Dispensational Theology (on YouTube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee4RS5pDntQ


.

What, and rob you of your joy, lol

Post away, brother, whom yours will sway due to a similar way of approaching reasoning through a thing, which approach is then applied by their hearers to Scripture, to arrive at, "hmmm, makes sense to me..." it will sway, and whom it will not, it will not

 

[dan p]

While you are making corrections, you also forgot to give credit to Lacunza, Irving, and Darby for the origin of your doctrine.




PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418



Genesis of Dispensational Theology (on YouTube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee4RS5pDntQ


.

Hi , and I can not read long posts as my eyes are bad .

So make a list of what this person says , since he does not believe Paul wrote Hewbrews !!

The Only dispensationalist that I read is Robert C Brock and I have talked ans also met with hin in FLORIDA !

He has written a verve by verse of all of Hebrews and lets see what you said why APOLLOS and what Doah can prove who scriptually wrote Hebrews !!

dan p

 

[Danoh]

Originally Posted by BABerean2

While you are making corrections, you also forgot to give credit to Lacunza, Irving, and Darby for the origin of your doctrine.

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsiteP....php?docid=418

Genesis of Dispensational Theology (on YouTube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee4RS5pDntQ

Hi , and I can not read long posts as my eyes are bad .

So make a list of what this person says , since he does not believe Paul wrote Hewbrews !!

The Only dispensationalist that I read is Robert C Brock and I have talked ans also met with hin in FLORIDA !

He has written a verve by verse of all of Hebrews and lets see what you said why APOLLOS and what Doah can prove who scriptually wrote Hebrews !!

dan p

Dan p, the man's mind is made up, at the very same time that he remains unaware of the very process by which he has arrived at his off base conclusion as to the actual origin of Dispensationalism, given how these things actually work.

Unaware of it, he is applying the automatic processes of Induction [information gathering] - Premise [conclusion formed based on said information] - Deduction [assertions and or actions from said premise].

He is unaware that he is applying this automatic process given each of us by God in His original creation, Adam [there it is in the Genesis 3 account of man's fall due to their unsound use of it].

Just as he is unaware of its underlying principles, and as a result of said unawareness, violates them unawares.

The result?

His off-base conclusion and its equally off-base deductions based as they both are on information gathered in both an off-base manner, and outside source.

How do I know?

Because, when I apply this principle to my examining his assertions concerning Lacunza, Irving, and Darby, and us, by his equally off-base automatic association, I find the following:

That, as he was not there during application of this automatic process of Induction-Premise-Deduction I have just described, and that as he was not there during Stam's, and he was certainly not there during Darby's, nor during Irving's nor during Lacunza's - and - does - not - know the true heart and or practice of any of these individuals, all he can do is speculate, which he unfortunately takes to be the same as actually being certain.

Fact is, even what I have just asserted cannot be understood without this automatic process of Induction-Premise-Deduction firing off.

Question is, being that it is automatic - where is one likely to be off at any point within said process?

An even greater question being - has one constantly examined one's application of this process during one's own Bible studies?

Obviously he has not. As faulty habits left unexamined, followed by disciplined commitment to their correcting, just continue to spill over in the application of the above process to other endeavors.

It was in my awareness of the above process that I began to note "Things That Differ" in Scripture way before I had ever even heard of the label, Dispensationalism, let alone Mid-Acts, or the names Jordan, or Stam, or any of his books, or what have you.

As a result, my first exposure outside of my own time in Scripture noting these things, my first exposure outside of that was one that is commonly reported within Mid-Acts ranks - when I first encountered Dispensationalism I[I was fortunate it was Mid-Acts] right away I saw it for what it was - the Things That Differ that I had for some time been noting in Scripture but could not wrap my head around.

Like that simple distinction as to Things That Differ that Paul asserts in Romans 1-3 and again, in Romans 6 and again in... ad infinitum...

In - this - who - is - to - say - that is not where Lacunza or Irving or Darby, or whomever were when they read what they read where they may have - who?

I mean who that is actually fair about this question, if it has ever dawned on them to ask it in the interest of fairness, to begin with?

He who asks it honestly only to realize he has no answer other than the premise of information gathered in what is obviously a manner missing some key principles as to how the above, automatic, God given process in Adam, works.

BAB2 obviously believes that more and more information, off as it is as to the above consideration is the key to putting aright what he has concluded is in error.

Obviously, he too is applying the above process, but just as obviously, unaware of his inadequacy in its skillful application in some key areas.

I mean, no one is perfect. Still, here it is, laid out. Lets' see what he makes of it even as he applies it to coming up with his reply to this.

Its too bad, really, as he seems to care about these issues enough to search out all he does.

"But he that had received one [talent] went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money" - Matthew 25:18.

 

[BABerean2]

Originally Posted by BABerean2

While you are making corrections, you also forgot to give credit to Lacunza, Irving, and Darby for the origin of your doctrine.

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsiteP....php?docid=418

Genesis of Dispensational Theology (on YouTube)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee4RS5pDntQ



Dan p, the man's mind is made up, at the very same time that he remains unaware of the very process by which he has arrived at his off base conclusion as to the actual origin of Dispensationalism, given how these things actually work.

Unaware of it, he is applying the automatic processes of Induction [information gathering] - Premise [conclusion formed based on said information] - Deduction [assertions and or actions from said premise].

He is unaware that he is applying this automatic process given each of us by God in His original creation, Adam [there it is in the Genesis 3 account of man's fall due to their unsound use of it].

Just as he is unaware of its underlying principles, and as a result of said unawareness, violates them unawares.

The result?

His off-base conclusion and its equally off-base deductions based as they both are on information gathered in both an off-base manner, and outside source.

How do I know?

Because, when I apply this principle to my examining his assertions concerning Lacunza, Irving, and Darby, and us, by his equally off-base automatic association, I find the following:

That, as he was not there during application of this automatic process of Induction-Premise-Deduction I have just described, and that as he was not there during Stam's, and he was certainly not there during Darby's, nor during Irving's nor during Lacunza's - and - does - not - know the true heart and or practice of any of these individuals, all he can do is speculate, which he unfortunately takes to be the same as actually being certain.

Fact is, even what I have just asserted cannot be understood without this automatic process of Induction-Premise-Deduction firing off.

Question is, being that it is automatic - where is one likely to be off at any point within said process?

An even greater question being - has one constantly examined one's application of this process during one's own Bible studies?

Obviously he has not. As faulty habits left unexamined, followed by disciplined commitment to their correcting, just continue to spill over in the application of the above process to other endeavors.

It was in my awareness of the above process that I began to note "Things That Differ" in Scripture way before I had ever even heard of the label, Dispensationalism, let alone Mid-Acts, or the names Jordan, or Stam, or any of his books, or what have you.

As a result, my first exposure outside of my own time in Scripture noting these things, my first exposure outside of that was one that is commonly reported within Mid-Acts ranks - when I first encountered Dispensationalism I[I was fortunate it was Mid-Acts] right away I saw it for what it was - the Things That Differ that I had for some time been noting in Scripture but could not wrap my head around.

Like that simple distinction as to Things That Differ that Paul asserts in Romans 1-3 and again, in Romans 6 and again in... ad infinitum...

In - this - who - is - to - say - that is not where Lacunza or Irving or Darby, or whomever were when they read what they read where they may have - who?

I mean who that is actually fair about this question, if it has ever dawned on them to ask it in the interest of fairness, to begin with?

He who asks it honestly only to realize he has no answer other than the premise of information gathered in what is obviously a manner missing some key principles as to how the above, automatic, God given process in Adam, works.

BAB2 obviously believes that more and more information, off as it is as to the above consideration is the key to putting aright what he has concluded is in error.

Obviously, he too is applying the above process, but just as obviously, unaware of his inadequacy in its skillful application in some key areas.

I mean, no one is perfect. Still, here it is, laid out. Lets' see what he makes of it even as he applies it to coming up with his reply to this.

Its too bad, really, as he seems to care about these issues enough to search out all he does.

"But he that had received one [talent] went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money" - Matthew 25:18.

Understanding the Kingdom of God- Pastor John Otis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oxzu5Rnqors

 

[Danoh]

A summary of the basic Premise behind Pastor John Otis' Deductions.

The Information he gathered [Induction] towards said Premise having obviously been informed by his indoctrination in a particular understanding beforehand.

I don't say that as a negative, rather as an observation.

Negatives do no allow Scripture's "received the word" of another, there, of Paul "with all readiness of mind."

Only then should one proceed forward to the task of "searching the Scriptures daily whether those things were so" Acts 17:11.

And that, in accord with certain key principles for conducting said search that are free of Reformed, Dispensational, or what have you school of "what's right."

Triumphant Publications

Kingdom, Church and Eschatology

"A seminar conducted the week of January 4-8, 2010 as credit for ministerial students in Christ Theological Seminary, which is associated with the Reformed Presbyterian Church in the United States (RPCUS). Anyone interested in the subject was permitted to attend the seminar lectures for free."

"Pastor John M. Otis was the instructor for the 28 hours of lecture. The course was designed to give exegetical proof for the postmillennial view of Eschatology. The church is not seen as some parenthesis in biblical history, but having existence since the creation of man. In contrast to Dispensationalism, there are not two distinct peoples in God's plan, but only one people, the church. The Church of Jesus Christ is the spiritual seed of Abraham and possesses all the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant. They do not belong exclusively to national Israel as Dispensationalism insists. The Kingdom of God is not something that comes after Christ's physical Second Coming. The Kingdom of God is internal, and is associated with the millenium. The millenium is not after the Second Coming; it is before. We are presently in the millenium, and the church is the divinely appointed agent that the reigning King Jesus uses to fulfill His mediatorial reign on earth. Jesus is presently reigning! We are presently in the millenial age. There will be victory in history of the spread of the gospel before the Second Coming. The Great Commission will be fulfilled. The Second Coming, the bodily resurrection, and the Last Day of Judgment are coterminous events, meaning they occur together, not separated by a millennium."

Whether or not Otis proves his case will depend on how one applies the process of Induction - Premise - Deduction/Assertion throughout both one's receiving and searching out of Otis' word [Deductions/Assertions].

Meaning, one first has to apply said three-fold process to examining how one applies said three-fold process itself!

This, towards hopefully better approximating the objective set below, in Proverbs 3:

5. Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
6. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
7. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.

 

[BABerean2]

Although I do not desire to be put in one of the boxes of Preterist, Futurist, Amillennialist, or Postmillennialist, I lean toward the futurist view that we are headed toward a One-World Globalist system.

Having said that, Pastor John Otis does a beautiful job of using scripture to reveal the Kingdom of God. His belief that we are to continue preaching the Gospel until the whole world comes to Christ, is a beautiful viewpoint.
He is critical of Dispensationalism, because he does not believe it matches up with what is written in God's Word.
I completely agree with him on that point.
Scripture is the final test of any doctrine.

A pastor that I love once told me that when it came to the Jewish people, it is not finished.
How do you tell a man you love that he is going against the very words of the Savior on the Cross?

Is the Church a parenthesis in God's plan that will be removed 7 years before the return of Christ?
Have you ever heard of the commander of a war removing his best troops and placing them in retirement until the final day of the war? These troops cannot really be destroyed because they are immortal. They may fall on the battlefield, but will still be resurrected for that final day of battle.

Some say Christ does not want a battered Bride. Have these people read what happened to Stephen, and most of the Apostles? Have they read what the Romans did to the early Christians in the Coliseum? Have they seen the recent news of how are Brothers and Sisters in the middle east are being tortured and killed for our faith?

How can anyone know all of this and then say...
"The Church will not go through the tribulation, because Christ does not want a battered Bride."
Please do not go to the middle east and make that comment to the families of Christians who have just been killed.


If you really want to know the truth, listen to Pastor John Otis reveal the Kingdom of God, through a careful exegesis of scripture.

Then read the book "Things that Differ" by C.R. Stam.

Read everything you can get your hands on and listen to every viewpoint that is available from all sources.

Then judge all of them only by what is plainly written in the Word of God.

.

 

[Danoh]

Although I do not desire to be put in one of the boxes of Preterist, Futurist, Amillennialist, or Postmillennialist, I lean toward the futurist view that we are headed toward a One-World Globalist system.

Having said that, Pastor John Otis does a beautiful job of using scripture to reveal the Kingdom of God. His belief that we are to continue preaching the Gospel until the whole world comes to Christ, is a beautiful viewpoint.
He is critical of Dispensationalism, because he does not believe it matches up with what is written in God's Word.
I completely agree with him on that point.
Scripture is the final test of any doctrine.

A pastor that I love once told me that when it came to the Jewish people, it is not finished.
How do you tell a man you love that he is going against the very words of the Savior on the Cross?

Is the Church a parenthesis in God's plan that will be removed 7 years before the return of Christ?
Have you ever heard of the commander of a war removing his best troops and placing them in retirement until the final day of the war? These troops cannot really be destroyed because they are immortal. They may fall on the battlefield, but will still be resurrected for that final day of battle.

Some say Christ does not want a battered Bride. Have these people read what happened to Stephen, and most of the Apostles? Have they read what the Romans did to the early Christians in the Coliseum? Have they seen the recent news of how are Brothers and Sisters in the middle east are being tortured and killed for our faith?

How can anyone know all of this and then say...
"The Church will not go through the tribulation, because Christ does not want a battered Bride."
Please do not go to the middle east and make that comment to the families of Christians who have just been killed.


If you really want to know the truth, listen to Pastor John Otis reveal the Kingdom of God, through a careful exegesis of scripture.

Then read the book "Things that Differ" by C.R. Stam.

Read everything you can get your hands on and listen to every viewpoint that is available from all sources.

Then judge all of them only by what is plainly written in the Word of God.

.

And none of that will do you any good at getting at the truth until you first apply the principle of Induction - Premise - Deduction/Assertion to your own process of getting at the sense of the passages.

Look at Genesis 3 - this three-fold process is there in Eve, just as it is in each of us - Induction - Premise - Deduction/Assertion.

She allowed it to go south in two critical ways - not applying said threefold process both to itself, and in light of the Word - not doing so, together with replacing the Word with an outside source.

Adam's number, not left out of the equation being, as the old saying goes - Adam eight one two...

By the way, not that I agree with all of it's perspective, though I do agree completely with its heart, here is a document for you, enjoy

http://www.moriel.org/PDF/Newsletter/2002/3Q-2002_The_New_Galatians.pdf

 

[BABerean2]

And none of that will do you any good at getting at the truth until you first apply the principle of Induction - Premise - Deduction/Assertion to your own process of getting at the sense of the passages.

Look at Genesis 3 - this three-fold process is there in Eve, just as it is in each of us - Induction - Premise - Deduction/Assertion.

She allowed it to go south in two critical ways - not applying said threefold process both to itself, and in light of the Word - not doing so, together with replacing the Word with an outside source.

Adam's number, not left out of the equation being, as the old saying goes - Adam eight one two...

By the way, not that I agree with all of it's perspective, though I do agree completely with its heart, here is a document for you, enjoy

http://www.moriel.org/PDF/Newsletter/2002/3Q-2002_The_New_Galatians.pdf

I agree with the part about many in the Jewish Roots movement becoming modern Judaizers.
It is amazing to me that they can ignore what is clearly written in the New Testament.

I disagree with their statement that Jeremiah 31:31 says that the New Covenant was made with Israel and the Jews, not the Church.
(That is pure nonsense, no matter what kind of three-fold process is used.)

.

 

[riverrat]

I agree with the part about many in the Jewish Roots movement becoming modern Judaizers.
It is amazing to me that they can ignore what is clearly written in the New Testament.

I disagree with their statement that Jeremiah 31:31 says that the New Covenant was made with Israel and the Jews, not the Church.
(That is pure nonsense, no matter what kind of three-fold process is used.)

.

You may disagree and think it is nonsense but Jer 31:31 clearly says the new covenant is for the house of Israel and the house of Judah.

 

[Danoh]

I agree with the part about many in the Jewish Roots movement becoming modern Judaizers.
It is amazing to me that they can ignore what is clearly written in the New Testament.

I disagree with their statement that Jeremiah 31:31 says that the New Covenant was made with Israel and the Jews, not the Church.
(That is pure nonsense, no matter what kind of three-fold process is used.)

.

That pdf is a good one - lots of info to know about, just not over rely on.

And, you do realize that your Assertion is the result of your having applied the three-fold process I have been describing.

Only, a bit off base.

And your ignorance in this is not surprising. For while you tout "being a Berean too," look how quickly you deny the usefulness of a process you had to rely on to assert what you just have.

Had you instead "received" my "word" on this "with all readiness of mind" that you might then "search the Scriptures daily whether those things were so," you'd have eventually ended up seeing its evidence in Genesis 3, where, there, just as you just have, Eve is depicted mis-applying this God given ability in Adam to...

Gather information [Induction] towards forming a Premise one then Deduces what one deduces, from said Premise.

You make the same mistake they made - relying on one's own reasoning, together with outside sources, in contrast to applying this God given ability in Adam - Induction-Premise-Deduction - thru His Word.

As a result, by the time you come to the Word, you do so from a Premise not already set.

Think on this; don't be so quick to be offended by it or to dismiss it just because it is new to you.

It is possible to be objective.

Be as willing to take what you dish out.

In Him,