Dispensationalist Only The Jews and Election

Jack Terrence

Fighting the good fight
Feb 15, 2013
2,851
194
✟27,525.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Biblewriter wrote:
It is not interpretation that the last nine chapters of Ezekiel were to happen in the future. This is explicitly and stated in Ezekiel 43:6 and in several more places in these chapters.
The context offers no evidence whatsoever that Ezekiel 43:6 is to have fulfillment in our future. Ezekiel 43:19 suggests that the temple was to be built within Ezekiel’s lifetime, for he was to give the animals to the sons of Zadok to offer in the temple; Ezekiel was to prepare the daily sacrifice (Ezekiel 46:13).
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeaconDean
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Larkin's Charts are a good general summation of Dispensationalism, although it differs somewhat in detail from the concepts of both the classical dispsensationalists of the nineteenth century and of the dispensationalists that subscribe to the changes introduced in the early twentieth century by Dwight Pentecost.

But that is a detail.

My main response, with which I will end this, is that you are neglecting the change in dispensations. At every change in dispensations, God has always changed the way which He relates to mankind. The three most drastic and noticeable of these changes is when God ended His open fellowship with mankind after the sin in the garden, when He gave the law of Moses, and when He offered free grade to all after our Lord paid for our sins on the cross.

But there have been other such changes as well. These are just the three most drastic. Now if God has the sovereign right to change the way n which He relates to mankind whenever He chooses to, (and He does) then He has the right to do this again in the future.

It is not interpretation that the last nine chapters of Ezekiel were to happen in the future. This is explicitly and stated in Ezekiel 43:6 and in several more places in these chapters. And we know it has not happened. So it is simply unbelief to deny that this will happen in the future. Whether or not we understand how it can happen is trivial. God said it, and we are responsible to believe it.

We need to be very cautious that we do not give more credence to our interpretation means, than to what another scripture explicitly says.

And in Covenant Theology, the change in "dispensations" is marked by the different covenants.

But, in each and every instance, even in dispensationalism, the current covenant/dispensation, does not render the previous one "null and void".

The only marked change in both covenants and dispensations, is the manner in which God deals with mankind.

Did Noah's dispensation differ from Adam's? No, just like Adam, Noah still earned his bread from the sweat of his brow. The only difference was that God promised He would not ever again "flood" the earth.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It is not interpretation that the last nine chapters of Ezekiel were to happen in the future. This is explicitly and stated in Ezekiel 43:6 and in several more places in these chapters. And we know it has not happened. So it is simply unbelief to deny that this will happen in the future. Whether or not we understand how it can happen is trivial. God said it, and we are responsible to believe it

Listen to this:

Biblewriter wrote:The context offers no evidence whatsoever that Ezekiel 43:6 is to have fulfillment in our future. Ezekiel 43:19 suggests that the temple was to be built within Ezekiel’s lifetime, for he was to give the animals to the sons of Zadok to offer in the temple; Ezekiel was to prepare the daily sacrifice (Ezekiel 46:13).

One more question for you Biblewriter.

At any point in the scriptures, has God ever made a "conditional" promise?

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Larkin's Charts are a good general summation of Dispensationalism, although it differs somewhat in detail from the concepts of both the classical dispsensationalists of the nineteenth century and of the dispensationalists that subscribe to the changes introduced in the early twentieth century by Dwight Pentecost.

FYI: I was taught early dispensationalism; i.e. Cyrus Ingerson Scofield

My mother bought me the "First Scofield Reference Bible" first published in 1909.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Also:

"The purpose of each dispensation, then, is to place man under a specific rule of conduct, but such stewardship is not a condition of salvation. In every past dispensation, unregenerate man has failed, and he has failed in this current dispensation and will in the future. But salvation has been and will continue to be available to him by God's grace through faith."

C. I. Scofield, The First Scofield Reference Bible, 1909, "Dispensations in the Bible", 1:28, p 4

Now what Dispensationalists call the Dispensation of "Innocence", Covenant Theologians call it the "Adamic Covenant"

But here is something both ignore.

Both Dispensationalists and Covenant theologians do not count the creation event. Both will recognize only the time as marked by when God took the rib and created Eve.

In this, Dispensationalists call it the "Dispensation of Innocence" and it lasted until Adam sinned. Then starts another "dispensation" the "Conscious or Moral Responsibility".

I say, however that the creation event up to Adam sinning should all be included under the "Dispensation of Innocence".

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Rather than being a "classic" dispensationalist, Scofield himself was a relative latecomer to Dispensationalism. The main elements of Dispensationalism were being taught in the first two centuries of the church, and it was clearly set forth in the mid 1700s, even though it never became formalized as a doctrine until it was popularized by J. N. Darby and his associates in the early to mid 1800s.

But that is a detail.

I agree with with the quotation from Scofield that you posted, as would any well taught Dispensationalist of today. Salvation always was, and always will be, by grace through faith. But God is the sovereign Ruler of all creation, and particularly of His family, which is currently known as "the church." And as the sovereign Ruler, He has an absolute right to change the details of what He requires of His people, at any time He chooses.

We both agree that He has done this at several times in the past. The sticking point between us seems to be whether or not He has the right to change these requirements again in the future. I contend that He has the absolute right to do this, and that He has also plainly declared that He will do exactly this, not just once, but at least two times in the future. (Although we have not even been discussing what the scriptures say about the eternal state.)
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Rather than being a "classic" dispensationalist, Scofield himself was a relative latecomer to Dispensationalism. The main elements of Dispensationalism were being taught in the first two centuries of the church, and it was clearly set forth in the mid 1700s, even though it never became formalized as a doctrine until it was popularized by J. N. Darby and his associates in the early to mid 1800s.

But that is a detail.

I agree with with the quotation from Scofield that you posted, as would any well taught Dispensationalist of today. Salvation always was, and always will be, by grace through faith. But God is the sovereign Ruler of all creation, and particularly of His family, which is currently known as "the church." And as the sovereign Ruler, He has an absolute right to change the details of what He requires of His people, at any time He chooses.

We both agree that He has done this at several times in the past. The sticking point between us seems to be whether or not He has the right to change these requirements again in the future. I contend that He has the absolute right to do this, and that He has also plainly declared that He will do exactly this, not just once, but at least two times in the future. (Although we have not even been discussing what the scriptures say about the eternal state.)

Again, no argument from me.

But, has God made conditional promises in the past?

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
And in Covenant Theology, the change in "dispensations" is marked by the different covenants.

But, in each and every instance, even in dispensationalism, the current covenant/dispensation, does not render the previous one "null and void".

And yet Christians insist that the New Covenant renders the Old null and void.
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
And yet Christians insist that the New Covenant renders the Old null and void.
GOD replaced the covenants. GOD says that the new is a new and better covenant built on better promises and the blood of God and not sheep.

Have you ever asked God why He decided to give have a New Covenant? Isn't it to write His Word on our hearts so that we wouldn't be like the Old Covenant people who did not obey
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
GOD replaced the covenants. GOD says that the new is a new and better covenant built on better promises and the blood of God and not sheep.

Have you ever asked God why He decided to give have a New Covenant? Isn't it to write His Word on our hearts so that we wouldn't be like the Old Covenant people who did not obey

What laws is God writing on Judah and Israel's hearts? What are the better promises? Jeremiah 31 through 33 explain all this.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Again, no argument from me.

But, has God made conditional promises in the past?

God Bless

Till all are one.

God made some promises to Israel that were conditional, and others that were unconditional.But one of the unconditional promises was that He would eventually bring all Israel to the repentance which was the condition of the conditional promises. So the end result is that all of God's promises to the nation of Israel are unconditional.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
And yet Christians insist that the New Covenant renders the Old null and void.

It does.

We are told:

"And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone." -Deut. 4:13 (KJV)

People seem to think that Moses went up on Mt. Sinai, received the Decalogue and came back down. No sir, he was up their 40 days (cf. Ex. 34:38). And in that time, not only did he receive the Decalogue, but the "Torah" also.

Notice well that these are not my words. The Decalogue and the Torah were both declared to be His covenant.

And then there is the "New Covenant" of Hebrews.

We teach our children the Decalogue. These are the "ground rules" for them for life. However, there comes a time in their lives where they no longer need it. That is where Gal. 3:23-26 comes into play.

Covenant theology recognizes that the Old Testament was a "covenant of works":

"Historic covenantal theology makes an important distinction between the covenant of works and the covenant of grace. The covenant of works refers to the covenant that God made with Adam and Eve in their pristine purity before the fall, in which God promised them blessedness contingent upon their obedience to His command. After the fall, the fact that God continued to promise redemption to creatures who had violated the covenant of works, that ongoing promise of redemption is defined as the covenant of grace."

Christians are no longer under the old way of if you do this, I will do that for you. Or, if you don't do this, I won't do that for you.

Sorry, but I'll have to disagree with you.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
God made some promises to Israel that were conditional, and others that were unconditional.But one of the unconditional promises was that He would eventually bring all Israel to the repentance which was the condition of the conditional promises. So the end result is that all of God's promises to the nation of Israel are unconditional.

So I take it from your response, that you believe what is written in Romans:

"all Israel shall be saved" -Rom. 11:26

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
So I take it from your response, that you believe what is written in Romans:

"all Israel shall be saved" -Rom. 11:26

God Bless

Till all are one.
Yes, all Israel shall be saved. But that will only be after Ezekiel20:33-38, where we read, "' As I live,' says the Lord GOD, 'surely with a mighty hand, with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out, I will rule over you. I will bring you out from the peoples and gather you out of the countries where you are scattered, with a mighty hand, with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out. And I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples, and there I will plead My case with you face to face. Just as I pleaded My case with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so I will plead My case with you,' says the Lord GOD. 'I will make you pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant; I will purge the rebels from among you, and those who transgress against Me; I will bring them out of the country where they dwell, but they shall not enter the land of Israel. Then you will know that I am the LORD.'" Ezekiel 20:33-38
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
And in Covenant Theology, the change in "dispensations" is marked by the different covenants.

But, in each and every instance, even in dispensationalism, the current covenant/dispensation, does not render the previous one "null and void".

The only marked change in both covenants and dispensations, is the manner in which God deals with mankind.

Did Noah's dispensation differ from Adam's? No, just like Adam, Noah still earned his bread from the sweat of his brow. The only difference was that God promised He would not ever again "flood" the earth.

God Bless

Till all are one.
That is the biggest understatement I have ever heard. If you think the New Covenant Jesus doesn't expect everyone that believes to be under, then why did God fortell the New Covenant and the Old Covenant people were waiting for it?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Yes, all Israel shall be saved. But that will only be after Ezekiel20:33-38, where we read, "' As I live,' says the Lord GOD, 'surely with a mighty hand, with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out, I will rule over you. I will bring you out from the peoples and gather you out of the countries where you are scattered, with a mighty hand, with an outstretched arm, and with fury poured out. And I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples, and there I will plead My case with you face to face. Just as I pleaded My case with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so I will plead My case with you,' says the Lord GOD. 'I will make you pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant; I will purge the rebels from among you, and those who transgress against Me; I will bring them out of the country where they dwell, but they shall not enter the land of Israel. Then you will know that I am the LORD.'" Ezekiel 20:33-38

You see, there is another inherent problem with just what you said.

If "all Israel" in Romans, literally means "all Israel" as in "corporate election", then tell me is there any need to preach, teach, or witness to Jews today?

Evidently not for John Hagee and several other evangelists have signed an agreement that they will not preach, teach, or witness to Israel, for just that very reason.

It's funny that you take that position because Paul also said in Romans that "not all Israel is Israel".

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
That is the biggest understatement I have ever heard. If you think the New Covenant Jesus doesn't expect everyone that believes to be under, then why did God fortell the New Covenant and the Old Covenant people were waiting for it?

Please, before you jump down my throat, why don't you read what Covenant Theology teaches.

I said what they said, plain and simple.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
That is the biggest understatement I have ever heard. If you think the New Covenant Jesus doesn't expect everyone that believes to be under, then why did God fortell the New Covenant and the Old Covenant people were waiting for it?

In Covenant Theology, they see basically three:
  1. Covenant of Works
  2. Covenant of Grace
  3. Covenant of Redemption.
But they also see it, for lack of a better word, "progressive" in that they recognize the "covenants" marked out in the Old Testament, or "sub-divided" into:
  1. Adamic Covenant
  2. Noahic Covenant
  3. Abrahamic Covenant
  4. Mosaic Covenant
  5. Davidic Covenant
  6. New Covenant
  7. Covenant of Redemption.
Dispensationalism, don't look necessarily at the three covenants, but they do recognize that God's revelation is progressive. And each "dispensation" was marked by the "covenants".
  1. Innocence
  2. Conscious
  3. Human Government
  4. Promise
  5. Law
  6. Grace
  7. Millennial
When Adam was kicked out of the Garden, God set conditions that Adam and his offspring would live under. Namely his bread coming from the sweat of his brow. This lasted until Noah's time when man was thinking about evil constantly. God shut Noah and his family along with amimals, and flooded the earth. Afterwards, God said He would never do that again, and as proof of God's covenant, we have the rainbow, which still happens today. Did the Noahic covenant change or nullify the Adamic Covenant? No, its still in effect today. Did anything change?Yes, the way God dealt with man changed. God caused the flood, killed everybody and everything, animals included, except those safe in the Ark. And we have this on down the line.

The main difference in the above, would be the obvious that Covenant Theology puts the entire OT up to the crucifixion under "The Covenant of Works." We are now under "The Covenant of Grace." And upon His return, we'll be under "The Covenant of Redemption".

So what I said was true.

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Like I said, I do consider myself a dispensationalist. I have been one since I was 12, I'm 55 now, so that's what, 43 years.

But I also admit that there are some things dispensationalism teaches that I don't agree with.

I also consider myself to a Baptist and a Calvinist. But I don't agree with everything John Calvin taught.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,937
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
You see, there is another inherent problem with just what you said.

If "all Israel" in Romans, literally means "all Israel" as in "corporate election", then tell me is there any need to preach, teach, or witness to Jews today?

Evidently not for John Hagee and several other evangelists have signed an agreement that they will not preach, teach, or witness to Israel, for just that very reason.

It's funny that you take that position because Paul also said in Romans that "not all Israel is Israel".

God Bless

Till all are one.

You reacted emotionally to my post without even considering what it said. Although I did indeed insist that the words "all Israel shall be saved" will be literally fulfilled, I also, end very clearly said, "But that will only be after Ezekiel20:33-38."
 
Upvote 0