Messianics and Dispensationalism

[dnc101]

Pay attention man!

LROL! 'k, I gottit!

So the general idea is that some Jewish believers tend to be dispensationalist, but not in the strict sense we might think. I'd probably have to do a search and read up on it to really understand, which ain't happenin' right now. Gonna put my sleep deprived brain to bed and see if I can correct one problem at a time.

Thanks for the response.

Dan C

 

[ananda]

Again, Everyone is entitled an opinion. This is one Messianic ministries viewpoint. I'm quite sure you have yours. Try expressing it without trying to tear someone or something down, no? Wouldn't that be he most Messiah-like thing to do?

I'm not pointing out something that's merely an opinion, but a logical fallacy.

 

[Shimshon]

LROL! 'k, I gottit!

So the general idea is that some Jewish believers tend to be dispensationalist, but not in the strict sense we might think. I'd probably have to do a search and read up on it to really understand, which ain't happenin' right now. Gonna put my sleep deprived brain to bed and see if I can correct one problem at a time.

Thanks for the response.

Dan C

Have a good night Dan!

 

[annier]

In a way. But, true Calvinistic Covenant Theology has nothing whatsoever to do with normative Judaism. CT is systematically replacement theology.

How is covenant theology replacement theology. I ask because I have never understood it to be so. I do not believe in replacement theolgy, but, I do consider my views to fall within the lines of covenants.
But, more thinking on how the covenants relate to each other, since none are abolished by a later covenant. Hence creating things like increase of sin, because of men which God made the covenant with are sinners and faithless. Which this also increases grace, extended by the other which these same are also in covenant. Which may even be a covenantalistic dispensationalism way of seeing things.

 

[Shimshon]

I'm not pointing out something that's merely an opinion, but a logical fallacy.

They did not say "all" . That means you misunderstood what was said, no?

 

[ananda]

They did not say "all" . That means you misunderstood what was said, no?

"they do not understand what it teaches more than anything else", in context, seems pretty clearly written in reference to "Messianic Jews" as a whole.

 

[Shimshon]

"they do not understand what it teaches more than anything else", in context, seems pretty clearly written in reference to "Messianic Jews" as a whole.

If this is as constructive as you can get I'll leave you to you opinions. Good night

 

[annier]

In a way. But, true Calvinistic Covenant Theology has nothing whatsoever to do with normative Judaism. CT is systematically replacement theology.

But it could have to do with a first century Jewish context, right?

 

[mishkan]

Yes, and no. I like Ariel Ministries response here:

This is the whole problem with taking "Messianic" commentary from Jewish Christians who are fully engaged in the church agenda. Arnold can only see the world in terms of Dispensationalism versus Covenantalism. He wears blinders that prevent him from perceiving that the whole topic is misguided.

 

[mishkan]

In a way. But, true Calvinistic Covenant Theology has nothing whatsoever to do with normative Judaism. CT is systematically replacement theology.

So is Dispy. Dispies just use more words to say the same thing.

 

[mishkan]

How is covenant theology replacement theology. I ask because I have never understood it to be so. I do not believe in replacement theolgy, but, I do consider my views to fall within the lines of covenants.

Formal Covenantal Theology teaches that there is one "people of God" at a time. It used to be composed of Jews. Now it is composed of the Church. That's the swap that constitutes Replacement Theology.

But, more thinking on how the covenants relate to each other, since none are abolished by a later covenant. Hence creating things like increase of sin, because of men which God made the covenant with are sinners and faithless. Which this also increases grace, extended by the other which these same are also in covenant. Which may even be a covenantalistic dispensationalism way of seeing things.

The whole topic is really about reconciling the "problems" perceived by Christians when they read about the Sinai Covenant and the midrashic expansion on a "New Covenant", as described in Hebrews. It doesn't really matter whether we are looking at historical covenantalism or modern dispensationalism. No matter whether they come up with 2, 3, 7, or 12 covenants/dispensations, the end result is the same--a desperate attempt to associate the Jews with something that is old, dead, and gone, while associating Christians with something that is fresh, alive, and eternal.

 

[Shimshon]

This is the whole problem with taking "Messianic" commentary from Jewish Christians who are fully engaged in the church agenda. Arnold can only see the world in terms of Dispensationalism versus Covenantalism. He wears blinders that prevent him from perceiving that the whole topic is misguided.

I think this applies equally to you too, as you appear to have a similar type of agenda and blinders. It appears you can't understand a Jewish Christian without believing there is an agenda at play. You seem to only see the world in terms of Judaism and the Sinai covenant, and wear blindiers that prevent you from preceiving that God has dealt with his people in a different way than before. Same people, different way of responding to them. Same God, different way of relating to his people. God never changes, but the way he responds and deals with us does. That's bible 101.

So is Dispy. Dispies just use more words to say the same thing.

Maybe so, but not in regards to the Messianic Jewish understanding of it. As proved by Ariel Ministries, and a host of other Messianic ministries, congregations and associations world wide. So it would be foolish to apply guilt by association while refusing to understand the way such Messianic Jewish ministries apply dispensational understanding. They don't just take up the 'Christian' understanding of it and run with it as you imply. They have made thier own understanding that is different than CT or mainstream Christian understanding. That would have been the point of Ariel's response as I understand it.

Far from an agenda, it's been a theological base since the beginning of the modern movement. And can be seen as far back as the Apostles. By those without blinders and agendas.

If it wasn't such an engrained belief within Messianic Judaism why have you been fighting for going on 30 yrs to disprove it?

 

[Shimshon]

How is covenant theology replacement theology. I ask because I have never understood it to be so. I do not believe in replacement theolgy, but, I do consider my views to fall within the lines of covenants.
But, more thinking on how the covenants relate to each other, since none are abolished by a later covenant. Hence creating things like increase of sin, because of men which God made the covenant with are sinners and faithless. Which this also increases grace, extended by the other which these same are also in covenant. Which may even be a covenantalistic dispensationalism way of seeing things.

it's sort of the problem today trying to describe our belief by existing labels. Someone has already come along and defined the term for themselves, then when another redefines it to thier understanding and applies the same word you get confusion and guilt by association.

I believe I understand what your getting at. That God has multiple covenants with numerous generations of his people. And deals with them accordingly. In this way I can see 'coventialism', but the fact remains that formal covenant theology was a calvinistic form of replacement theology. Jewish covenants and covenant theology are polar opposites, as one replaces the other completely with new people, while the other are the continuation of God dealing with his people, the Jews.

What the theology of people like Mishkah seem to put forth is that God did not move beyond the Sinai covenant and never will, as such when God opened up the covenant to the nations of the world through Yeshua, He intended to mearly include them into the Sinai covenant, makiing them his people in that way. Which is not bible 101, but one law theology. Which is really neo-ebionitism, and not fully endorsed by any mainstream Messianic Jewish organization. Though they are growing in number, as seen in online discussion forums. But the number is far from the majority. They just have a loud voice.

The 'new' covenant opened up a new era of unity between Israel and all the nations of the world. And it was promised and prophisied from the beginning. The whole world is His, and will bow down in worship. Every knee will bow. He made a new day dawn on his people, renewing them and adding to them the riches of the world, all the nations.

God gave each day for a new start, every day is a new beginning, a new dispensation of God's grace. A new day to live again. A reset moon to count the next month. If God intended things to be static he would have made the creation as such. But far from it, the creation moves and renews in endless cycles. Perpetual change, as our God remains the same. I guess this is something only a dispensationalist can grasp, no?

 

[visionary]

What the theology of people like Mishkah seem to put forth is that God did not move beyond the Sinai covenant and never will, as such when God opened up the covenant to the nations of the world through Yeshua, He intended to mearly include them into the Sinai covenant, makiing them his people in that way.

God is consistent...Let me reword this.... God will not move beyond the Sinai covenant as it opens up the covenant to the nations of the world through Yeshua, which He intended to make his people observant of His statues, laws, and ordinances. It is His rules, His Way, His Judgment.

 

[mercy1061]

I think this applies equally to you too, as you appear to have a similar type of agenda and blinders. It appears you can't understand a Jewish Christian without believing there is an agenda at play. You seem to only see the world in terms of Judaism and the Sinai covenant, and wear blindiers that prevent you from preceiving that God has dealt with his people in a different way than before. Same people, different way of responding to them. Same God, different way of relating to his people. God never changes, but the way he responds and deals with us does. That's bible 101.

What are your thoughts on "circumcision on the 8th day"?

We know Abraham "replaced" Isaac with the ram in the bush, but G-d still requires a burnt offering.

Romans 12:1
I exhort you, therefore, brothers, in view of God’s mercies, to offer yourselves as a sacrifice, living and set apart for God. This will please him; it is the logical “Temple worship” for you.


Contrary to popular oppinion, you are suppose to leave your gift by the altar;

Matt 5
23 So if you are offering your gift at the Temple altar and you remember there that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift where it is by the altar, and go, make peace with your brother. Then come back and offer your gift.


Abraham did not leave his gift by the altar, but he replaced his gift he placed on the altar with the ram. Human sacrifice were suppose to be "living", animal sacrifices were always dead; Abraham was not suppose to attempt to harm Isaac but instead he was suppose to set his "only son" on fire burned alive. Replacement theology threatens Israel father Isaac with the knife and sacrifices the ram all over again. Let us hear Jeremiah.

Jer 20
9 But if I say, “I won’t think about him,
I won’t speak in his name any more,”
then it seems as though a fire
is burning in my heart,
imprisoned in my bones;
I wear myself out
trying to hold it in,
but I just can’t do it.

Maybe so, but not regards to the Messianic Jewish understanding of it. As proved by Ariel Ministries, and a host of other Messianic ministries, congregations and associations world wide. So it would be foolish to apply guilt by association while refusing to understand the way such Messianic Jewish ministries apply dispensational understanding. They don't just take up the 'Christian' understanding of it and run with it as you imply. They have made thier own understanding that is different than CT or mainstream Christian understanding. That would have been the point of Ariel's response as I understand it.

Do you still see the rainbow in the sky?

Far from an agenda, it's been a theological base since the beginning of the modern movement. And can be seen as far back as the Apostles. By those without blinders and agenda's.

If it wasn't such an engrained belief within Messianic Judaism why have you been fighting for going on 30 yrs to disprove it?

The old and new covenants are made with the same family of Israel and her sister Judah. Israel's flag still has the "Star of David" displayed on it's flag? No?

Shall we follow the "Star of David" or "Star of Bethlehem" to reach the Messiah?

7 Herod summoned the Magi to meet with him privately and asked them exactly when the star had appeared. 8 Then he sent them to Beit-Lechem with these instructions: “Search carefully for the child; and when you find him, let me know, so that I too may go and worship him.”
9 After they had listened to the king, they went away; and the star which they had seen in the east went in front of them until it came and stopped over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they were overjoyed.

 

[Shimshon]

God is consistent...

Yes, God remains the same. But, did he command you to build an ark? God is consistent, but he moves in a myriad of ways. And speaks to certain people certain things that are not for others. Or were the levi'im supposed to have land? God is consistent, but his revelations grows as a tree. I would say, stop pruning what God is growing!! He consistently grows his children into his image. God remains the same....I think I mentioned that?

 

[visionary]

Yes, God remains the same. But, did he command you to build an ark? God is consistent, but he moves in a myriad of ways. And speaks to certain people certain things that are not for others. Or were the levi'im supposed to have land? God is consistent, but his revelations grows as a tree. I would say, stop pruning what God is growing!! He consistently grows his children into his image. God remains the same....I think I mentioned that?

God is consistent on what His Kingdom is, His Laws are.... Now just because He moves in a myriad of ways doesn't change His consistence. It is like a moral man, just because He changed jobs doesn't mean that he changed his morals.

 

[mercy1061]

Yes, God remains the same. But, did he command you to build an ark? God is consistent, but he moves in a myriad of ways. And speaks to certain people certain things that are not for others. Or were the levi'im supposed to have land? God is consistent, but his revelations grows as a tree. I would say, stop pruning what God is growing!! He consistently grows his children into his image. God remains the same....I think I mentioned that?

Do you remember when Israel built the "ark of the covenant"?

Can you see the rainbow in the cloud that Noah saw?

Ex 13
21 Adonai went ahead of them in a column of cloud during the daytime to lead them on their way, and at night in a column of fire to give them light; thus they could travel both by day and by night.

Heb 12:1
So then, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us, too, put aside every impediment — that is, the sin which easily hampers our forward movement — and keep running with endurance in the contest set before us,

 

[annier]

Formal Covenantal Theology teaches that there is one "people of God" at a time.

just for clarification of this issue in my mind anyway. I would like to give an example of the above in another form.
From my understanding of differences between triniatarianism and modalism, may have the same concept as your above comments. From what I understand of modalsim, is distinct modes (different covenants), but only one mode operating at a time.
I dunno though, I could be misunderstanding the issue between trinitarians and modalsits. BUT.....I will continue for the sake of my point anyway, to see what you think.

Trinitarianism on the other hand in expressing distinct persons ( as the term person does not intend a meaning an individual in the human understanding of that term) . That these while distinct persons (covenants) do operate simultaneously in relationship with one another.

It used to be composed of Jews. Now it is composed of the Church. That's the swap that constitutes Replacement Theology.

I am not so sure the wording here is benefitial. Here is why I say this. Doesn't replacement theology speak of Israel as a collective whole, as opposed to Jews, which can denote individuals? So while replacement theology is about the entire nation of the people of Israel, the Church ( a distinct collective before God) is made up of Jews and Gentiles. So Replacement theology seems to be more about the Church's role replacing that of Israel as a nation, in the world.
Which by the way, I do not agree with this, I am simply attempting to clarify things for the sake of discussion. For if the Church were to have applied the concept of covenants tyo their own doctrine on persons, they would not deny the operations of covenants being effective either.

What are your thoughts on this? As I said I could be misunderstanding some of the things about modalism, but I am pretty sure (not positive) Of what I have read on the subject.

 

[Shimshon]

We all have agendas. Some come from Gentile churchianity, and some come from historical Jewish sources. I traveled for a long time in the same circles as Arnold. It was immensely freeing to finally rid myself of the dispensational bias.



Not Bible 101... Dispensationalism 101. As I said, Christians feel compelled to create complex systematic frameworks in order to justify their attempts to rid themselves of the Torah, in favor of the alleged "grace" that stands against covenantal nomism. You share that anti-Torah framework, apparently.

No I do not. I also do not see ALL Christians ridding themselves of Torah as you say. Your gross generalization is not called for.



Not sure what you think you're saying, here.

That a Messianic Jewish Ministry which is part of a world wide association of Messianic Jews hold to a form of dispensation. Not typical Christian dispensation, but a modified understanding of such. Jews who belive in dispensation. They exist, and are not mearly 'midevil Christians'.


They have done nothing different from any other dispensationalist. That's simply a fact. Arnold is mainstream dispensationalism. There is nothing new in what he presents.

As I said, dispensationalism is nothing new, has been around since the beginning, and was based on the writtings of the Apostles. Messianic Judaism never rejected dispensational theology wholesale as you are.



"It"? Are you claiming the "Apostles" were dispensationalists??? And you don't think that's an agenda-driven claim?

Nonesense



That's an odd question, obviously designed purely to poison the well.

I haven't been "fighting" anything for 30 years. I have been pursuing a fuller understanding of Scripture and God's dealings with mankind for 30+ years. Along the way, I recognized the failing of all Christian theology--the need to abrogate the Torah and replace it with a Gentile version of "grace alone" that doesn't fit the model revealed in the Tanakh. Only after recognizing that fact can one crawl outside the box of medieval Christian philosophy and get a fresh perspective on the consistency of the Biblical revelation.

If you like the Christian frameworks and agendas, that's fine. But they aren't Jewish, and they don't have a place in an authentic Messianic Judaism.

This is completely uncalled for. Who are you to determine who is or who is not a Jew or an authentic Messianic Jew? Believe me, your proving to be no expert at all.

It's quite Jewish, you just don't accept nor understand it. You continually deny the Jewishness of the Jews in the Movement. THAT is a boring agenda. You misrepresent Jewish Christians in every keystroke. I am not anti-Torah, nor Grace only, nor do I hold to mainstream Christian theology. But since you are blined to this argument for over 30 yrs you can't see straight and mislabel and misrepresent what you are afraid of.

I have no issue with you beliving what you will, but your mischarictarizations are grossly uncalled for, and blindly stated. I can provide whole organizations of Messianic Judaism that profess this theological understanding, but you just erase thier identity denying them any Judaism what so ever, and use Christian as a derogetory term..?

I would include you, but you would excommunicate me. Want to address the commonalities of our faith instead of tear down that which you obviously do not understand? I didn't poison the well, you did when you started with your anti-Christian agenda.

Why is it you can not identify the least with Christians/Christianity? To you all things must be Jewish? Care to embrace those who are within your community? Or do you not see yourself as part of the Christian community/faith group?

Would your agenda be to prove Christians/Christianity wrong and normative Judaism as the proper faith for all the world? That's what I'm seeing here.