Why the Constant Attack?

JWO said:

Because Dispensationalism is actually a denomination?

Click to expand...

Absolutely not. Dispensationalism is a belief that goes back almost two thousand years, and spans many denominations.

JWO said:

Jesus uses the words of the Law to prove that Satan is Apostate.
So, either the Letter to Hebrews is wrong... or you think Jesus was wrong to use the words of the Law. Both ways won't work.

Click to expand...

When people claim that one part of the Bible contradicts another part of the Bible, they completely discredit themselves as Christian teachers.

The Boxer said:

This is completely false and you know it.

Click to expand...

Except, of course, that I have repeatedly posted hard proof that it was taught, and clearly taught in the document that contains the very oldest Christian commentary on Bible prophecy (of any significant length) that has survived to the present day. This is the last twelve chapters of the very famous five volume work by Irenaeus, titled "Against Heresies." which is believed to have been published between 186 and 188 A.D.

Irenaeus used the word "dispensation" for a period of time in which God related to mankind in a specific way. He named three past and one present dispensations, and posited possible future ones. He used the word Dispensation, or its plural form Dispensations, ore than eighty times, and taight that a failure to understand "the dispensations of God" kept people from understanding Bible prophecy.

The Boxer said:

Let's see now:

Irenaeus,: Adamic covenant, the covenant with Noah, the Mosaic covenant, and the new covenant
Dispensationalism: Innocence, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace millennial kingdom

Irenaeus: four "dispensations" total.
Dispensationalism: seven total.

Look here friend, you are doing the same thing the anti-trinitarians do. The anti-trinitarians misrepresent the ECFs. Please produce a church father that ever taught that animal sacrifices would be reinstituted as Dispensationalism teaches. This alone makes Dispensationalism non-christian as it crucifies the Son of God again and puts him to an open shame.

Click to expand...

You are quite mistaken in thinking that Dispensationalism is a fixed system of a specific number of Dispensations. While most Dispensationalists indeed see seven dispensations in scripture, some see more than seven, some see fewer.

In addition to the passage of Irenaeus which you cited, (which is from Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book III, chapter XI, section 8.) He also taught the essence of dispensationalism in the following statements:

“Therefore the Son of the Father declares [Him] from the beginning, inasmuch as He was with the Father from the beginning, who did also show to the human race prophetic visions, and diversities of gifts, and His own ministrations, and the glory of the Father, in regular order and connection, at the fitting time for the benefit [of mankind]. For where there is a regular succession, there is also fixedness; and where fixedness, there suitability to the period; and where suitability, there also utility. And for this reason did the Word become the dispenser of the paternal grace for the benefit of men, for whom He made such great dispensations, revealing God indeed to men, but presenting man to God, and preserving at the same time the invisibility of the Father, lest man should at any time become a despiser of God, and that he should always possess something towards which he might advance; but, on the other hand, revealing God to men through many dispensations, lest man, failing away from God altogether, should cease to exist.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book IV, chapter XX, section 7.)

Before we go on, we need to notice certain key parts of this statement. Irenaeus said that God has “from the beginning” shown “to the human race prophetic visions” “in regular order and connection, at the fitting time,” and in “a regular succession,” with “suitability to the period.” And we particularly need to notice his statement that the Word was “revealing God to men through many dispensations.”

A little further on in the same chapter, Irenaeus clarified this by saying, “The only-begotten God, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared [Him];’ and He does Himself also interpret the Word of the Father as being rich and great); not in one figure, nor in one character, did He appear to those seeing Him, but according to the reasons and effects aimed at in His dispensations, as it is written in Daniel.” And further down in the same section, he added, “Thus does the Word of God always preserve the outlines, as it were, of things to come, and points out to men the various forms (species), as it were, of the dispensations of the Father, teaching us the things pertaining to God.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book IV, chapter XX, section 11.)

And a few chapters later, Irenaeus further said, “There is one and the same God the Father, and His Word, who has been always present with the human race, by means indeed of various dispensations, and has wrought out many things, and saved from the beginning those who are saved, (for these are they who love God, and follow the Word of God according to the class to which they belong,) and has judged those who are judged, that is, those who forget God, and are blasphemous, and transgressors of His word.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book IV, chapter XXVIII, section 2.)

We already noticed in the first quotation we examined that Irenaeus said that the Word was “revealing God to men through many dispensations,” and that he said that this was done “at the fitting time,” in “a regular succession,” with “suitability to the period.” Now we see that he added that the Word “has been always present with the human race,” and saved various individuals “according to the class to which they belong.”

All of this was about past dispensations, but Irenaeus not only spoke of past dispensations, but of future ones as well, saying, “Inasmuch, therefore, as the opinions of certain [orthodox persons] are derived from heretical discourses, they are both ignorant of God’s dispensations, and of the mystery of the resurrection of the just, and of the [earthly] kingdom which is the commencement of incorruption, by means of which kingdom those who shall be worthy are accustomed gradually to partake of the divine nature; and it is necessary to tell them respecting those things, that it behoves the righteous first to receive the promise of the inheritance which God promised to the fathers, and to reign in it, when they rise again to behold God in this creation which is renovated, and that the judgment should take place afterwards.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book V, chapter XXXII, section 1.)

In this short summary, I have included only a few statements that summarized his thoughts on the matter. But he spoke of these things many times, using the word dispensation, or its plural form dispensations, well over eighty times. He explicitly named a few of these dispensations, namely “the dispensation of the law,” (book III, chapter XI, section 7, and again in book III, chapter XV, section 3) which he also called “the Levitical Dispensation,” (book IV, Title of chapter XVII.) “the Mosaic dispensation,” (book IV, chapter XXXVI, section 2.) and “the legal dispensation.” (book III, chapter X, section 2 and the title of book V, chapter VIII.) He used this last term a third time, contrasting it with “the new dispensation of liberty” in book III, chapter X, section 4. Finally, he referred to “the future dispensation of the human race.” (book III, chapter XXII, section 3.) We should also note that he used the term the “dispensations of God,” eight times, in book I, chapter X, section 1, book I, chapter XVI, section 3, book II, chapter XXV, section 3, book III, chapter XI, section 9, book IV, chapter XX, section 10, book IV, chapter XXI, section 3, book IV, chapter XXIII, section 1, and book IV, chapter XXXIII, section 1.

Irenaeus insisted that his doctrine of the dispensations was what the church had always taught, saying, ““The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents...” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book I, chapter X, section 1.) He said again that “Where, therefore, the gifts of the Lord have been placed, there it behoves us to learn the truth, [namely,] from those who possess that succession of the Church which is from the apostles, and among whom exists that which is sound and blameless in conduct, as well as that which is unadulterated and incorrupt in speech. For these also preserve this faith of ours in one God who created all things; and they increase that love [which we have] for the Son of God, who accomplished such marvellous dispensations for our sake: and they expound the Scriptures to us without danger, neither blaspheming God, nor dishonouring the patriarchs, nor despising the prophets.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book IV, chapter XXVI, section 5.)

As to a future offering of Animal sacrifices, when you deny that they will be offered, you are denying explicitly stated scripture, preferring instead YOUR INTERPRETATION that these would negate the sacrifice of Jesus.

Anyone who has actually bothered to study these future sacrifices, as I have, knows that they are NOT a return to the law of Moses, but a new system of worship, unlike anything ever before practiced. To have even have attempted to put the law if Ezekiel into practice before the cross, would have subjected the person making that attemot to the penalty of death. Not only are the sacrifices themselves different, but even the people who act as priests are different.

The Boxer said:

First, thank you for confirming that Irenaeus did NOT teach Dispensationalism. He taught that there were various dispensations. But he did NOT teach that the Church was a parenthesis or that there is a distinction between Israel and the Church or that animal sacrifices would be re-instituted.

Second, the bible does NOT explicitly state that animal sacrifices will be re-instituted in OUR future. It explicitly states that they would be re-instituted in EZEKIEL'S TIME. The visions of Ezekiel were for Israel immediately after they came out of captivity and returned to the land. I offer these infallible proofs:

1. God told Ezekiel to tell Israel that the fulfillment of ALL his visions was AT HAND and WOULD NOT BE POSTPONED (12:21-28).
2. EZEKIEL HIMSELF was to provide the priests with the bull for the sin offering (43:19).

Ezekiel himself was to provide the priests with the bull for the sin offering. So using your logic Ezekiel should have been put to death and it would have been God's fault for commanding him to provide the bull. And it EXPLICITLY says that those sacrifices were for ATONEMENT (43:20, 26). Therefore, if we take the book of Hebrews seriously we must conclude that anyone who attempts to put Ezekiel's law into practice AFTER the cross is an APOSTATE.

Click to expand...

Ezekiel 12 was a prophecy that they would be carried away into captivity. And this indeed happened soon afterward. But everything after Ezekiel 36 was about the distant future.

And the worship detailed in Ezekiel 43-46 is indeed significantly different from the law of Moses. the fact that you are ignorant of this fact does not change it.

The Boxer said:

You are reading chapter 12 wrong. It says that the fulfillment of EVERY vision would not be postponed. God reasons from the general to the particular. If every vision would not be postponed, then the judgment would not be postponed.

This is confirmed by Isaiah in which God said to them, "Keep justice, and do righteousness, for my deliverance is about to come (Isaiah 56:1). God was addressing the exiles regarding their deliverance from Babylon and their return to the land. They were in captivity, they were delivered, they returned to the land and rebuilt the temple under Zerubbabel. There is no "gap" in between their deliverance and their return to the land and the rebuilding of the temple. Dispensationalism loves to create gaps. Can you show that Irenaeus had gaps?

So what? God can make changes if he so chooses. It explicitly says that Ezekiel himself was to provide the priests with a bull for a "sin offering." This puts fulfillment in Ezekiel's time. It says that the priests were to "make atonement." Nothing whatsoever is said about animal sacrifices being offered as a "memorial" according to the inventions of the Dispensationalists. That idea is totally made up. Seeing that there remains no more sacrifice for sin after the cross, then it was fulfilled BEFORE the cross.

Click to expand...

If your interpretation of Ezekiel 12 were correct, then Jesus would have to have been born, and returned to judge the world, in Ezekiel's time, instead of coming hundreds of years later, as He actually did, and not even yet having come to judge the world.

And there is zero excuse for claiming that the generic word "you" in Ezekiel 43:19 meant Ezekiel himself. The preceding verse explicitly says that the instructions applied to "the altar on the day when it is made." But no such altar was made in the time of Ezekiel.