Messianics and Dispensationalism

[mishkan]

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.

Yes, (in)consistency of terms does make conversation difficult, sometimes.

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.

I agree completely with this point.

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.

Yay! TWO points of agreement.

What the theology of people like Mishkah (sic) 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.

Your grasp of my perspective is accurate. Sinai is the beginning and end of God's concept of "peoplehood". He has declared from the beginning that the Torah is the crowning glory of Israel, the evidence of the greatness of their God. The Torah also tells us that the culmination of history will come when the Jewish people recognize their need for repentance and return to the Torah.

Which is not bible 101, but one law theology.

One man's Bible 101 is another man's heresy.

Which is really neo-ebionitism, and not fully endorsed by any mainstream Messianic Jewish organization.

Neither labeling nor comparison with others is relevant to the accuracy of any view.

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.

A loud voice? I suppose facts are hard things to avoid. That must be what makes them seem so loud.

The 'new' covenant opened up a new era of unity between Israel and all the nations of the world.

No covenant did that. The emplacement of the Messianic King did. And Yeshua is King by virtue of the Davidic monarchy. If anything, you would have to tie this new era of unity to the Davidic covenant, as described in Psalm 89.

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.

The whole world is his, yes. But he sets Israel at the capitol, and joins the other nations to Israel. You should read Ephesians 2 more carefully.

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?

Something only a dispensationalist is programmed to grasp? Sadly, yes.

 

[Shimshon]

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.

We disagree. There is so much more to God than focusing on the Sinai covenant. Many Messianic Jews do not believe that covenant is the center of the universe. Even the nonbelieving Jews came to grips with the inability to accomplish the covenant any longer as it was given due to the actions of God himself scattering them into the nations. If normative Jews can understand how God removed them from the land and created an inablity to function the covenant, yet remain in God's grace, why can't some Messianics grasp this?

God remains the same to them too, yet they understand God is dealing with them 'outside' of the covenant made at Sinai. Meaning, God made it impossible to function as given, and yet they do not see themselves as cut off from God completely. They understand God is still loving them here in the exile. As they are not able to function the Torah given them, they still remain God's people though they have made a different way of worshiping him outside of the Sinai covenant. i.e Rabbinical Judaism

They seek to restore the full covenant in the future, we understand God has fulfilled it and revealed more of his ways through Yeshua. At least that is the message revealed through the Jewish Apostles of the Messianic faith.

 

[annier]

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,

My view of covenant theology, is very similar to Mishkah, ironically. Except,to think God does not move beyond the covenants of promise, made to Abraham . Any other covenant made after, did not do away with that former one. Even later covenants confirming it/them, and establishing it/them, in their own particular way.
Could it then be said, All later covenants in fulfilling and establishing those promises would even reveal all that Gods promises contain, and the depth of them, which would otherwise not be realized? For no other covenants are opposed to, but fulfill them.

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.

To me this same notion applies to Gentiles being included in the promises made to Abraham.
Concerning the above, it just dawned on me. In thinking on Paul's comments that the law was never opposed to the promises, made to their fathers, neither is the new covenant opposed to the promises made to Abraham. I just think God's faithfulness to those promises are sure as God himself.

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?

Thank you Shimshon, great post IMO.

 

[mercy1061]

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.

There is nothing new under the sun. I really mean there is nothing new under the sun (Ec 1:9).

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.

The new covenant is with Israel and her sister Judah.

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.

There was only "one law" in the garden of eden; do not eat from the tree called the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If a man won't work, he should not eat.

2 Thes 3
10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this command: if someone won’t work, he shouldn’t eat!

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.

Again, the new covenant is between Israel and her sister Judah!

Jer 31:31
30 (31) “Here, the days are coming,” says Adonai, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Isra’el and with the house of Y’hudah.

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?

If you truly understood "circular" or "orbital" reasoning you would comprehend that there is really nothing new under the sun! The same moon circles or orbits around the same earth; while the same earth orbits or circles around the same sun. The same other planets in this galaxy also orbits or circles around the same sun.

Yes indeed, even the solar system (which includes both heaven and earth) knows that there is nothing new under the sun.

 

[Shimshon]

My view of covenant theology, is very similar to Mishkah, ironically. Except,to think God does not move beyond the covenants of promise, made to Abraham . Any other covenant made after, did not do away with that former one. Even later covenants confirming it/them, and establishing it/them, in their own particular way. Could it then be said, later covenants in fulfilling and establishing those promises would even reveal all that Gods promises contain, and the depth of them, which would otherwise not be realized? For no other covenants are opposed to, but fulfill them.

To me this same notion applies to Gentiles being included in the promises made to Abraham.
Concerning the above, it just dawned on me. In thinking on Paul's comments that the law was never opposed to the promises, made to their fathers, neither is the new covenant opposed to the promises made to Abraham. I just think God's faithfulness to those promises are sure as God himself.

Thank you Shimshon, great post IMO.

As are your responses! I love the way you understand the promises made to Abraham, and agree. This is the foundational promise to Israel that we will never be forsaken by him and will recieve what he promised. Your correct, this promise is imbedded within the future covenants. It does not cease to be because of the Sinai covenant. Gentile inclusion in the family of God that is. Nor does it imply that because of the promise the nations will be added to the Sinai covenant. This is a false understanding of a Jewish covenant.

 

[Shimshon]

Yes, (in)consistency of terms does make conversation difficult, sometimes.



I agree completely with this point.



Yay! TWO points of agreement.



Your grasp of my perspective is accurate. Sinai is the beginning and end of God's concept of "peoplehood". He has declared from the beginning that the Torah is the crowning glory of Israel, the evidence of the greatness of their God. The Torah also tells us that the culmination of history will come when the Jewish people recognize their need for repentance and return to the Torah.



One man's Bible 101 is another man's heresy.



Neither labeling nor comparison with others is relevant to the accuracy of any view.



A loud voice? I suppose facts are hard things to avoid. That must be what makes them seem so loud.



No covenant did that. The emplacement of the Messianic King did. And Yeshua is King by virtue of the Davidic monarchy. If anything, you would have to tie this new era of unity to the Davidic covenant, as described in Psalm 89.



The whole world is his, yes. But he sets Israel at the capitol, and joins the other nations to Israel. You should read Ephesians 2 more carefully.



Something only a dispensationalist is programmed to grasp? Sadly, yes.

Thank you Mishkan, that was a much better reply. For the record, I have not been programmed by any 'Christian' theology as you would put it. My root does not stem from the church, though my vine grows among it, and within it, my foundation is Judaism. I seek and strive to be humble and inclusive to those who are not like me in every way, with no agenda to divide them out or discredit them for thier position. We should seek to uplift another and not tear each other down. The same goes for our theology. There are as many viewpoints as there are people, but the one thing Messiah commands above all is to treat them with love.

When my children act out, I don't excommunicate them from the family calling them not my children. Neither does God. Judgement is yet to come to the house of God as a whole, everyone still has a chance to know him. Even my nonbelieving Jewish family. Even the Christians who are grasping the only way they know to love God, our Father, through Yeshua the Messiah.

Remember the Bible movie recently let out? When Yeshua came up to Matthew the tax collector and spoke to him? The observant Jew condemned Yeshua for even talking to him, but Yeshua looked at that Jew with a hurt heart, and told him even he is worth reaching. And guess what? He became one of the apostles. A Jewish tax collector for Roman taxes. Messiah hates a proud heart, but lifts up those who are humble. So too, we should reject proud know it all's, and seek to uplift those who need in humility. Like laying your own coat down on the ground so another can pass without getting dirty. You give of yourself freely and expect nothing in return but the blessings of the other.

Surely as a man steeped in Jewish tradition you can grasp this?

 

[annier]

As are your responses! I love the way you understand the promises made to Abraham, and agree. This is the foundational promise to Israel that we will never be forsaken by him and will recieve what he promised. Your correct, this promise is imbedded within the future covenants. It does not cease to be because of the Sinai covenant. Gentile inclusion in the family of God that is. Nor does it imply that because of the promise the nations will be added to the Sinai covenant. This is a false understanding of a Jewish covenant.

Hey, Shimshon, I must ask you this. Do you think this is where covenant theology and dispensationalism meet head on?
That forms of the covenant promises being fulfilled, those forms being acknowledged as dispensations (of the promises prior, operating within that latter covenant)?
Thinking also on all former covenants to Israel being a fulfillment of those promises brings in the covenant made with David as well. This could be a very interesting aspect, as to the curious correlation at times between David and the priesthood. Many times it has been noted David wearing an ephod, and making sacrifices etc. Able to eat of the bread of presence inteneded only for the priests. Very interesting concepts there. Christ brought up David in this aspect alot. I am thinking on some good reasons why.

 

[Shimshon]

Hey, Shimshon, I must ask you this. Do you think this is where covenant theology and dispensationalism meet head on?
That forms of the covenant promises being fulfilled, those forms being acknowledged as dispensations?
Thinking also on all former covenants to Israel being a fulfillment of those promises brings in the covenant made with David as well. This could be a very interesting aspect, as to the curious correlation at times between David and the priesthood. Many times it has been noted David wearing an ephod, and making sacrifices etc. Able to eat of the bread of presence inteneded only for the priests. Very interesting concepts there. Christ brought up David in this aspect alot. I am thinking on some good reasons why.

Yes, I do. Clarifying that the covenant theology you speak of is not the calvinistic representation but an understanding that God deals with Israel through covenants. This has been represented by Christian theology in the forum of dispensationalism. As stated, I don't hold to the standard scofield representation, but as Ariel ministries pointed out, neither do they.

Yes, I believe your understanding the connection properly. David is a great example. With the heart of God he understood the future grace of his will. He knew the everlasting promise and held tight to it. As he did all those things you mentioned and the law keepers mocked him, he remained steadfast in the knowledge of God's grace. He knew the heart of God was for the future of his people, not the present day observances, but focused on the future blessings

 

[HannibalFlavius]

, we should reject proud know it all's,

What the?

What did I ever do against you?

 

[yedida]

There is nothing new under the sun. I really mean there is nothing new under the sun (Ec 1:9).



The new covenant is with Israel and her sister Judah.



There was only "one law" in the garden of eden; do not eat from the tree called the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If a man won't work, he should not eat.

2 Thes 3
10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this command: if someone won’t work, he shouldn’t eat!




Again, the new covenant is between Israel and her sister Judah!

Jer 31:31
30 (31) “Here, the days are coming,” says Adonai, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Isra’el and with the house of Y’hudah.




If you truly understood "circular" or "orbital" reasoning you would comprehend that there is really nothing new under the sun! The same sun circles or orbits around the same earth; while the same earth orbits or circles around the same sun. The same other planets in this galaxy also orbits or circles around the same sun.

Yes indeed, even the solar system (which includes both heaven and earth) knows that there is nothing new under the sun.

Nothing new under the sun? The fact that the SUN orbits the EARTH is kinda new to me.....

 

[ananda]

Nothing new under the sun? The fact that the SUN orbits the EARTH is kinda new to me.....

I know ya'll might call me crazy, but I believe that the earth is stationary

"YHWH reigneth; he is clothed with majesty; YHWH is clothed with strength; he hath girded himself therewith: The world also is established, that it cannot be moved." Psa 93:1 cf 1Chr 16:30

, and that Scripture states that the sun is what moves around the earth (cf Ecc 1:5, Psa 50:1, etc.)

Also, scientific studies involving measurements of the movement of the Earth failed to show any movement whatosever (e.g. Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Gale, Sagnac, Airy's failure, etc.).

 

[mercy1061]

Nothing new under the sun? The fact that the SUN orbits the EARTH is kinda new to me.....

My mistake, the same earth circles or orbits around the same sun. Thanks.

 

[mercy1061]

I know ya'll might call me crazy, but I believe that the earth is stationary

The earth is not stationary.

"YHWH reigneth; he is clothed with majesty; YHWH is clothed with strength; he hath girded himself therewith: The world also is established, that it cannot be moved." Psa 93:1 cf 1Chr 16:30

This verse does not state the earth is stationary; the earth can never be destroyed. Much in the same way mountains are firm, unmoveable; yet the earth can never be moved out of it's orbit around the sun. It was even said that the mountain could be cast into the sea; yet the mountain remain "unmoved" when it is cast into the sea.

Ps 93:1
Adonai is king, robed in majesty;
Adonai is robed, girded with strength;
The world is well established;
it cannot be moved.

1 Chr 16
30 Tremble before him, all the earth!
The world is firmly established, immovable.

, and that Scripture states that the sun is what moves around the earth (cf Ecc 1:5, Psa 50:1, etc.)

Ec 1:5
5 The sun rises, the sun sets;
then it speeds to its place and rises there.

Ps 50:1
(1) The Mighty One, God, Adonai, is speaking,
summoning the world from east to west.

These scriptures above do not state the sun orbits around the earth. "Sunrise" and "Sunset" these terms still exist in our society today; the writer of psalms words are poetic in nature. The sun may appear to move to the naked eye; yet if we use an instrument we discover it is actually the earth that is "spinning" on it's axis, it is really the sun that stands still.

Josh 10
13 So the sun stood still and the moon stayed put,
till Isra’el took vengeance on their enemies.

Now we should know that the moon's orbit corresponds to the earth's orbit; as the earth's motion corresponds to the sun.

Also, scientific studies involving measurements of the movement of the Earth failed to show any movement whatosever (e.g. Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Gale, Sagnac, Airy's failure, etc.).

Do you hold the position of geocentrism?


Modern geocentrism - RationalWiki

Modern geocentrism is the conceit that, despite the observational work of Copernicus and Galileo, the mathematical work of Kepler and Newton, the corroborating data of thousands of astronomers in the centuries since, and NASA's use of the heliocentric model to land probes anywhere in the solar system, the Earth is the immobile center of the universe. The Michelson-Morley experiment — the failure to observe changes in the speed of light relative to the motion of the observer — is often cited as corroborating evidence for geocentrism, the idea being that the speed of light can only be constant if the Earth is not in motion. Given that geocentricism fails to explain much of the observational data of both modern astronomy and modern physics, virtually no one within the scientific community accepts geocentrism.
For the most part, geocentrism is the position of a small minority of complete idiots, those primarily being extremely literalist Christian fundamentalists. But to compound the problem, sometimes these idiots will get their ravings printed in the pseudoscientific journals of Creation Ministries International.[1]
A common crank argument sadly unavailable to geocentrists is "They laughed at Galileo!"

 

[ananda]

The earth is not stationary.This verse does not state the earth is stationary; the earth can never be destroyed. Much in the same way mountains are firm, unmoveable; yet the earth can never be moved out of it's orbit around the sun. It was even said that the mountain could be cast into the sea; yet the mountain remain "unmoved" when it is cast into the sea.

So you claim, and so you interpret them. I interpret the verses differently.

These scriptures above do not state the sun orbits around the earth. "Sunrise" and "Sunset" these terms still exist in our society today; the writer of psalms words are poetic in nature. The sun may appear to move to the naked eye; yet if we use an instrument we discover it is actually the earth that is "spinning" on it's axis, it is really the sun that stands still.

What instrument is that?

My own senses tell me that the Earth is not moving millions of miles per hour, as the so-called scientists would have me believe (speed based on the earth allegedly spinning on its axis plus the earth allegedly rotating around the sun plus the solar system allegedly spinning around the galaxy plus the galaxy spinning in the void of the universe). In the heliocentric model held by relativistic theorists today, even the sun does not "stand still". I don't see the stars wildly spinning in different directions across the skies at night (which would have to happen if indeed the modern heliocentric model was true).

Do you hold the position of geocentrism? Modern geocentrism - RationalWiki

RationalWiki is not a scientific publication ("complete idiots", really?). I referenced multiple sources and scientific experiments that pointed to an unmoving Earth. To date, I am not aware of a single scientific experiment which proves a moving Earth. In fact, space organizations and airlines calculate craft maneuvers with formulas based on a fixed earth. (It would be impossible to calculate maneuvers based on a wildly spinning Earth rotating around its axis, sun, galaxy, and universe).

I suggest that heliocentricism is designed as a Satanic humanistic revision of Scriptural truths to cast doubt on Scripture itself, removing the significance of Earth by making it just another spinning ball of dirt in the vast universe filled with other balls of dirt.

 

[mercy1061]

So you claim, and so you interpret them. I interpret the verses differently.

Your understanding of scripture is not cogent. What are your thoughts on "circumcision on the 8th day"?

What instrument is that?

One instrument used in modern science is the telescope.

2 Cor 5:7

7 for we live by trust, not by what we see.

My own senses tell me that the Earth is not moving millions of miles per hour, as the so-called scientists would have me believe (speed based on the earth allegedly spinning on its axis plus the earth allegedly rotating around the sun plus the solar system allegedly spinning around the galaxy plus the galaxy spinning in the void of the universe). In the heliocentric model held by relativistic theorists today, even the sun does not stand still

The purpose of me mentioning the solar system was to show that you do not have "circular" or "orbital" reasoning; that is everything must return back to it's orgin; the earth keeps orbiting around the sun; the moon keeps orbiting around the earth. The topic of discussion is not about the earth's motion or movement around the sun, but "messianics and dispensationalism". I do not need to argue with you about "proving" the earth's rotation because even a middle school science teacher at your local school district could do that. My arguement was not designed to teach a science lesson; but to show that since everything must return back to it's origin it is not prudent to accept dispensationalism. By your comment's you do not even believe in the earth's rotation or orbit; so I know you do not accept circular reasoning.

Gen 3

19 You will eat bread by the sweat of your forehead till you return to the ground — for you were taken out of it: you are dust, and you will return to dust.”

I want you to read arguments in this forum if you desire scientific journals:http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2242594/pg28

RationalWiki is not a scientific publication (complete idiots, really?). I referenced multiple sources and scientific experiments that pointed to an unmoving Earth. To date, I am not aware of a single scientific experiment which proves a moving Earth. In fact, space organizations and airlines calculate craft maneuvers with formulas based on a fixed earth. (It would be impossible to calculate maneuvers based on a wildly spinning Earth rotating around its axis, sun, galaxy, and universe).

I suggest that heliocentricism is designed as a Satanic humanistic revision of Scriptural truths to cast doubt on Scripture itself, removing the significance of Earth by making it just another spinning ball of dirt in the vast universe filled with other balls of dirt.

Re: The earth does not move and you know it

Thus guy cites the original works of Michelson-Morley, Airy (Known as Airy's failure), Michelson-Gale and Sagnac. In every case these scientists did not disprove a rotating, revolving earth, in fact the Michelson-Gale mathmatical equasions included earth motion, one even correcting for latitude.

Dude, in all seriousness, someone is feeding you a line of bull, misquoting journals and misrepresenting the conclusions of these men.

Sagnac's experiments were on the 'ether' and did not account for either motion of earth or universe and his premises were exactly in line with Einstein's theory of relativity.

For the record, none of these men concluded that the earth is motionless, in fact, they all concluded the opposite view.

If you do not agree you should cite reference that anyone can read

 

[annier]

Yes, I do. Clarifying that the covenant theology you speak of is not the calvinistic representation but an understanding that God deals with Israel through covenants. This has been represented by Christian theology in the forum of dispensationalism. As stated, I don't hold to the standard scofield representation, but as Ariel ministries pointed out, neither do they.

Yes, I believe your understanding the connection properly. David is a great example. With the heart of God he understood the future grace of his will. He knew the everlasting promise and held tight to it. As he did all those things you mentioned and the law keepers mocked him, he remained steadfast in the knowledge of God's grace. He knew the heart of God was for the future of his people, not the present day observances, but focused on the future blessings

Ok, so now one last piece I would like to add for your opinion.
In understanding the Abrahamic covenant as a covenant of promises, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
There are promises to their seed as well, which are realized and known in latter covenants. Are various forms of the promises to their fathers.
The Abrahamic promises are that which contain, the grace, mercy, and glory which is fulfilled in later covenants.
HOWEVER, we, in our human nature can have negative views of those very wonderful things, even when they are revealed and we are offered to be the recipients of them. Which things are spoken of here

1cor 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

We see it here

Nu 16:8 And Moses said unto Korah, Hear, I pray you, ye sons of Levi:
9 Seemeth it but a small thing unto you, that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to himself to do the service of the tabernacle of the LORD, and to stand before the congregation to minister unto them?
10 And he hath brought thee near to him, and all thy brethren the sons of Levi with thee: and seek ye the priesthood also?
11 For which cause both thou and all thy company are gathered together against the LORD: and what is Aaron, that ye murmur against him?
The abrahamic promises operating in various forms through various covenants are also becoming more and more fully graceful,merciful, AND GLORIOUS. Which that excelling glory can make that which went before seem to the natural man to have no glory at all.
As Korah and his company are a prime example. They were made set apart before the Lord, and holier than the common people in relationship to Gods holy household. But....it came to be seen as a small thing, in comparing it to the priesthood of the sons of Aaron.

As the promises made to Abraham includes all of us, in latter covenants the grace and glory of them excells towards men as well. Some just see the former glory as no glory at all. the former mercy, no mercy at all,
Due to the excelling of those things.

LOL, we see it here

Mt 20:1 For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
2 And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
3 And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4 And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way.
5 Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise.
6 And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?
7 They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive.
8 So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.
9 And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.
10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
11 And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.

 

[ananda]

I want you to read arguments in this forum if you desire scientific journals:The Earth Does Not Move And You Know It - Page 28

Sorry, but I couldn't take your conclusions or anything else you wrote in your post seriously after you referenced a site that calls itself the "lunatic fringe"

 

[detention]

I think you both make a compelling point.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

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


Messianic Theology

As a Jew I don't hold to the standard definition of dispensationalism, as taught in seminaries. PretribRAPTURE and replacement theology. So I pose no threat in that way to my Jewish family.

I remember where some of his views were discussed elsewhere from previous discussion on the ways dispensational theology takes shape..as Dr. Arnold gave a lecture on Israelology course for Chafer Theological Seminary...recorded at West Houston Bible Church in Texas.

• Israelology – Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum – Recorded at Chafer Theological Seminary

The entire course is available free online at the Dean Bible Ministries website. Audio files can be downloaded or heard online here ): And the Powerpoint slides he did are found here/here. The main body of this course is the Israelology of dispensationalism taken from the instructors book Israelology: the Missing Link in Systematic Theology (also, the textbook for the study). Lesson one is introductory. Lesson two to the end of the course examines the Biblical sequence of Israel: past, present, and future from a Dispensational framework.

Also, for another excellent review (IMHO) by Fruchtenbaum, one can investigate his work entitled The Jewishness of Premillennial Eschatology. As a Messianic Jew, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum is quite extensive in his review. On Dr.Arnold's stance, there have times others have made it an issue that he may tend to hold to things leaning in the direction of Dispensationalism - although I do personally see where all things within that framework are really an issue when choosing to view it a certain way.

Many of his stances were taken with the expressed purpose of examining Dispensations and Dispensationalism - the study of a system of theology that has spearheaded the work against replacement theology...and a system that insists on taking the Bible literally and insists on the fact that every promise made to Israel will be fulfilled to Israel. Although I myself am not a Dispensationalist across the board - and have shared my thoughts on the issue before on the DUALITY OF Israel (more here in #72#99 /#103/ #266/#267 / #276 /#351 and threads like Identity Chrisis: Slander or Why support the nation of Israel? ), there are aspects (again) within it that I can see merit in when arguing that side. Dr.Fruchtenbaum actually mentioned the issue more in-depth before....as he noted best in one response on the issue

 

[intojoy]

I started out as a dispensationalist. Even got my degree at a dispensational school, Washington Bible College. But I am no longer dispy. It was just the best I could find back in 1985.

Since then, I have developed a more comprehensive view of Scripture, where I no longer feel the need to compare/contrast the falsely designated "new" and "old" testaments. That is, after all, the source for all Christian attempts at dividing time into eras,









during which different programs of salvation are offered to humanity. That is true for both covenantal and dispensational theologies.

Brother this is a false witness. How can you make a blanket statement as here your accusation of different programs for salvation? This is terrible. I do not know of one dispensationalist who has taught that.

Fruchtenbaum
Schaffer
Schofield
Ryrie

Are the top dispensationalist teachers of all time. Point to one of their words to support your witness against them, you can't. Just apologize that's good enough.