Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?

ViaCrucis said:

Because the chief article of Dispensationalist theology is that the Gospel is a temporary situation, a parenthesis in the divine plan, God's back up plan because Jesus actually failed. At the heart of Dispensationalist teaching is that Jesus came to establish an earthly kingdom, but things went wrong, the Jews did not en masse accept Him as their Messianic King, and so God went with Plan B--Jesus would be crucified, resurrected, and God would turn attention to the Gentiles for a season, but only for a season. Eventually God will return to focusing on His real people, the Jews. That's precisely why "the Rapture" is necessary, "the Rapture" is ultimately a necessary thing because it gets Christians out of the way so that God can return to working on the Jews as an earthly, national people. Christ's return in glory is to do what He was supposed to do the first time but failed to do--establish an earthly kingdom focused on earthly Israel, and that's what "the Millennium" is in Dispensationalism.

All of this is a deep, fundamental rejection of Christ, His Gospel, the entire story of redemption in Scripture, of God's grace, of salvation, and of God's word and all His promises from the beginning.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

You have a very interesting interpretation of this. What if you realize this was not God's backup plan?

As in God foreknew that the Jewish nation would reject Jesus as their Messiah since the world began, and hence everything happened as God the Father planned it to be?

Ephesians 3:1-9 summed it up well

For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

====

Take note that the term "dispensation" actually appeared in the Bible, so its not a man made term.

Guojing said:

You have a very interesting interpretation of this. What if you realize this was not God's backup plan?

Click to expand...

I don't believe it was God's backup plan. I believe it was God's one and only plan, from the beginning. Christ did not come to establish an earthly kingdom, He came as Savior of the world. There was never supposed to be a restoration of a Jewish nation in the Levant, that was never Christ's work. The kingdom Christ proclaimed was not a restoration of the monarchy, but the inauguration of God's reign through His death and resurrection for the whole world. For both Jew and Gentile alike without distinction and without discrimination.

Take note that the term "dispensation" actually appeared in the Bible, so its not a man made term.

Click to expand...

Which isn't relevant. The claim isn't that the word "dispensation" can't be found. The claim is that Dispensationalism is false. If I find a word in the Bible and create an entire elaborate false theology around it, that doesn't make my theology correct.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

I don't believe it was God's backup plan. I believe it was God's one and only plan, from the beginning. Christ did not come to establish an earthly kingdom, He came as Savior of the world. There was never supposed to be a restoration of a Jewish nation in the Levant, that was never Christ's work. The kingdom Christ proclaimed was not a restoration of the monarchy, but the inauguration of God's reign through His death and resurrection for the whole world. For both Jew and Gentile alike without distinction and without discrimination.



Which isn't relevant. The claim isn't that the word "dispensation" can't be found. The claim is that Dispensationalism is false. If I find a word in the Bible and create an entire elaborate false theology around it, that doesn't make my theology correct.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

You deny that there will be a 1000 year millennial reign where Jesus will actually rule the world from Jerusalem?

@Bible Highlighter
@ViaCrucis

Sorry it's taking me so long to reply. I work 3 12 hour shifts Wednesday through Friday, so I will respond this weekend. Thank you for your patience and God-bless,
Michael

CharismaticLady said:

Not sure why you want to go off into a tangent...

Click to expand...

Who mentioned "health" first ?

Is Yahuweh's Plan, Purpose and Word "UNhealthy" or healthy ?

CharismaticLady said:

If he ever wants me to stop painting pictures of Jesus, that it is a sin when He knows I want nothing to do with sin, He will convict me.

Click to expand...

Not according to His Word, (there are many people He does not* convict, even though they transgress daily) .

*(until judgment day)

Bible Highlighter said: ↑Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?

If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?

~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~

Click to expand...

Guojing said: ↑
When Jesus reign as King in the 1000 year Millennial, justice will be executed fairly.
When someone slap us on our left cheek, we can offer them our right. When someone steal our cloak, we can let them have our inner garment as well. This is because we can trust that Jesus, as the King, will defend us, because he knows all things.
Now, Paul said we are in the present evil age (Galatians 1:4), so those are not instructions for us now.

Click to expand...

ViaCrucis said:

So we are free to ignore and deny Jesus Christ...because the world is sinful?

Shouldn't it be the exact opposite? That we are, as St. Paul says, to be in the world but not of it? To not be conformed to this present age, but to be transformed by the renewing of our mind?

That as the Church, as the people of Jesus Christ, we are to be a city on a hill, the light of the world, and salt of the earth? To be a people whose allegiance is to Christ, not to the powers of this world. To live in accordance with God's kingdom, which we have become partakers of through Christ by our new birth (John 3:3-5).

Not that we can be perfect in this present age, not that we can attain the glory to which we presently hope now, for at present we labor and indeed all creation labors and groans looking forward to and awaiting that blessed hope when God makes all things new, when Christ returns, the dead are raised, and all creation restored. But that we have been called to be a people who are marked by Christ and His cross, to take up our cross and follow after Him. To be the cross-bearing, the crucified, people of God in this world--with our eyes set upon Christ the Author and Finisher of our faith, with our hope set upon the resurrection and the promise of eternal life in the Age to Come, to live in accordance with the way of Jesus in this world. To love our neighbor, to love even our enemies, to bless those who curse us, to pray for those who persecute us, to be good to those who are evil toward us. We turn the cheek, we forgive, we show mercy. We devote ourselves to the care of widows and orphans, devote ourselves toward justice for the poor, the hungry, the naked, the oppressed, the immigrant, and the dejected.

That we are to follow "the more excellent way" of love as St. Paul calls it. To be a people who beat our swords into plowshares, and spears into pruning shears. To be a people who call the Crucified One King and Lord. Knowing that no servant is greater than his master. That God as king, as exercised and manifest through the Suffering Messiah, is that the least is greatest, that the greatest amongst us is the slave. That the lowly shall be lifted up, the proud laid low.

Because Jesus Christ is Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Guojing said:

Ever wonder why Paul, our apostle, with the exception of the holy communion, almost never talk about what Jesus preached to the Jews in the flesh?

Click to expand...

ViaCrucis said:

You mean like how we should repay no one evil for evil, love our enemies, and do good to all? He does, in Romans chapter 12. Or perhaps you mean the new birth? He does in Titus 3:5. Perhaps you're thinking about the kingdom of God, well, he does, Acts 28:30-31
I don't have to wonder that, because it's not true.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Guojing said:

People keep using that particular Acts verse as a proof text that Paul was also preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom at the end of Acts.
The mistake you are making is that when you see the term "kingdom", you interpret the term "kingdom" to be the same, whenever you come across that term.

In the Bible, the same English word can have different meanings depending on the context.

The classic word is the word "heaven"

Gen 1:20 heaven is where birds fly, that is the sky we see above us, the first heaven.

Isaiah 13:10 talks about the stars of heaven, so there is where the Sun is located, outer space, the 2nd heaven.

And of course, the one that many dispensationalists would know of, Paul talks about being caught up in the 3rd heaven (2 Cor 12:2-4). That is where the throne of God is, beyond outer space

Thus, when Paul talks about the kingdom in Acts 28:30-31, please don't assume it has the same meaning as the kingdom that Peter was eagerly anticipating in Acts 1:6.

Click to expand...

ViaCrucis said:

The kingdom isn't "heaven". The kingdom is what Jesus Christ preached in the Gospels--God's reign. That's the kingdom which Christ announced, and which the Apostles proclaimed, and which the Church continues to preach. That God has sent His Son, Jesus the Christ, and through Him there is peace with God. God's kingdom isn't a government or a location, but this reality: Jesus Christ crucified, risen from the dead, ascended, and seated at the right hand of the Father having been given all power and authority. The captives are set free, the lame walk, the blind shall see. Victory has come over and against sin, death, hell, and the devil and we, the broken, are the benefactors who have been liberated and brought into the freedom as God's children through Christ. And, in the end, the dead shall rise, and all creation shall be made whole.

Dispensationalism is toxic garbage that denies Jesus Christ, denies the Gospel, denies the grace of God, denies the kingdom, denies all of God's word and promises, and should be rightfully scorned for the grotesque heresy that it is.
-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

food4thought said:

LOL! Tell us what you really think, brother...
In what way does dispensationalism do these things.
There are many different brands of dispensationalism these days, with many who are hyper-dispensational (Mid-Acts, Acts 28), and more conservative dispensationalists (Acts 2) feel they are in great error. Try not to paint with such a wide brush, brother. As for me, I am still willing to listen to why, exactly, people react with such vitriol towards a theological system that holds Scripture, and the God who inspired them, in extremely high regard as far as I can tell.

Click to expand...

ViaCrucis said:

One really only has to look at this thread to see examples. The words of Christ our God Himself argued away, He has told us to love others, even our enemies, to turn the other cheek, etc and instead of taking this as the inviolate command of our Lord and King it is taken as being non-applicable, pushed forward to some future period.

Because the chief article of Dispensationalist theology is that the Gospel is a temporary situation, a parenthesis in the divine plan, God's back up plan because Jesus actually failed. At the heart of Dispensationalist teaching is that Jesus came to establish an earthly kingdom, but things went wrong, the Jews did not en masse accept Him as their Messianic King, and so God went with Plan B--Jesus would be crucified, resurrected, and God would turn attention to the Gentiles for a season, but only for a season. Eventually God will return to focusing on His real people, the Jews. That's precisely why "the Rapture" is necessary, "the Rapture" is ultimately a necessary thing because it gets Christians out of the way so that God can return to working on the Jews as an earthly, national people. Christ's return in glory is to do what He was supposed to do the first time but failed to do--establish an earthly kingdom focused on earthly Israel, and that's what "the Millennium" is in Dispensationalism.

All of this is a deep, fundamental rejection of Christ, His Gospel, the entire story of redemption in Scripture, of God's grace, of salvation, and of God's word and all His promises from the beginning.



Yes, there are some forms of Dispensationalism which are worse than others--but it's all merely different degrees of error.

I will say, however, that fortunately the majority of those who subscribe to Dispensationalist don't seem to know the whole thing. They usually only know bits and pieces. But the problem is that as soon as they start to do any kind of digging, this is what Dispensationalist teachers teach. And the only choices available are to either recognize Dispensationalism for the heretical system that it is, and reject it; or else be persuaded by it, and then fully embrace something that is, at its very core, a deep rejection of Jesus Christ our Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Guojing said:

You have a very interesting interpretation of this. What if you realize this was not God's backup plan?

As in God foreknew that the Jewish nation would reject Jesus as their Messiah since the world began, and hence everything happened as God the Father planned it to be?

Ephesians 3:1-9 summed it up well

For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

====

Take note that the term "dispensation" actually appeared in the Bible, so its not a man made term.

Click to expand...

ViaCrucis said: ↑
I don't believe it was God's backup plan. I believe it was God's one and only plan, from the beginning. Christ did not come to establish an earthly kingdom, He came as Savior of the world. There was never supposed to be a restoration of a Jewish nation in the Levant, that was never Christ's work. The kingdom Christ proclaimed was not a restoration of the monarchy, but the inauguration of God's reign through His death and resurrection for the whole world. For both Jew and Gentile alike without distinction and without discrimination.



Which isn't relevant. The claim isn't that the word "dispensation" can't be found. The claim is that Dispensationalism is false. If I find a word in the Bible and create an entire elaborate false theology around it, that doesn't make my theology correct.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Guojing said:

You deny that there will be a 1000 year millennial reign where Jesus will actually rule the world from Jerusalem?

Click to expand...

Most Preterists and all Amills deny it, including me.......and why I am Preterist/Amill.....

I also reject the false view of Zionist Futurist Dispensationlalism and their view of a future Rapture.........

THE TRUE "REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY/SUPERSESSIONISM" OF THE BIBLE
=============

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD
Proof that Matthew 24 was fully fulfilled in 70 AD!
Also see: Rapture refuted

Rapture Refuted! Pre-tribulation Rapture and Premillennialism Refuted Home page

See: "Replacement theology" proven from the Bible!
See: The Origin of Rapture Doctrine in 1830 AD (Inventor: John Darby)
See: 50 ways Pre-millennialism contradicts the Bible
=============================================
Statement of Purpose - Eschatology Forum Statement of Purpose

• Partial Preterism: Partial preterism holds that most eschatological prophecies, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrists, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a "judgment-coming" of Christ, were fulfilled either in AD 70 or during the persecution of Christians under the Emperor Nero.
  
• The Second coming and the resurrection of the dead, however, have not yet occurred in the partial preterist system.

Millennialism:

• Amillennialism: "no millennium", rejects the theory that Jesus Christ will have a thousand-year-long, physical reign on the earth.
  
• 
  
• The amillennial viewpoint holds that the thousand years mentioned in Revelation 20 is a symbolic number, not a literal description; that the millennium has already begun and is identical with the current church age.

Difference between amillennialism & preterism

CryptoLutheran said:

Amillennialism is a specific position in regard to the Millennium, it says that the Millennium isn't intended to describe a literal period of time, but rather describes Christ's reign at the Father's right hand until the time of His coming.
Preterism is a position in regard to prophetic interpretation, sometimes contrasted with Futurism and Historicism.
Historicism would argue, for example, that what St. John the Revelator wrote has had an ongoing fulfillment since his day to ours, the earliest Protestants were Historicists, which led Luther, Calvin (et al) to conclude that the Papacy fulfilled the eschatological role of Antichrist and Beast (not the person of the Pope, per se, but rather the office of Pope).
Futurists would posit that all or most of everything in the Revelation will be fulfilled at a heretofore unspecified point in the future, Dispensationalists fall in this category (and they are also Premillennialists).

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Guojing said:

You deny that there will be a 1000 year millennial reign where Jesus will actually rule the world from Jerusalem?

Click to expand...

Orthodox Christian teaching is that the Millennium is figurative, not literal. The only reference to the thousand years is found in the Apocalypse of St. John, and as such it, like much everything else in the book, is symbolic.

Most Christians don't get their eschatology from the Apocalypse, but from the rest of Scripture. St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 says that when Christ comes He comes to hand over the kingdom to the Father, for Christ must reign (and He reigns right now) until He puts every enemy underfoot, the last enemy to be defeated is death. The defeat of death occurs at the resurrection of the dead, as the Apostle says,

"But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death." - 1 Corinthians 15:23-26

"Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

'Death is swallowed up in victory.'
'O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?'

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." - 1 Corinthians 15:51-57

For Christ our Lord shall return, the dead shall rise, and God shall make all things new and be all in all. A new heavens and a new earth.

The Apostle, to the Galatians says of Hagar and Sarah,

"One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written,

'Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear;
break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor!
For the children of the desolate one will be more
than those of the one who has a husband.'" - Galatians 4:24-27

"Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, 'Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.'

And he who was seated on the throne said, 'Behold, I am making all things new." - Revelation 21:1-5

-CryptoLutheran

Bible Highlighter said:

I have been a Non-Resistant Christian for several years now. I believe we are to turn the other cheek if we are struck, and we are to love and do good towards our enemies (Which is a radical change from the Old Testament or Old Covenant).

What I have come to recently discover in my New Testament commands study is that the command that says to Love our enemies (Which is one sub command in a series of 7 sub commands that falls under the umbrella of one main command that says for us to be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect - Matthew 5:38-48) is a salvation issue if we disobey it (Note: The commandment to "Be Perfect as the Heavenly Father" is the kind of command that is not teaching Sinless Perfection as some falsely assume; While I believe God calls us to put away all sin by the Lord's power, I do not believe being sinlessly perfect (like putting away faults of character, like not taking the trash out on time, or going over the speed limit, etc.) is a salvation issue). Anyways, Hebrews 12:14 is the command that the key in understanding here. Hebrews 12:14 says we are to "Follow after peace with all men... of which no man shall see the Lord." In other words, if we are hating our enemies, and we are not loving them, we are not making peace with them, and Hebrews 12:14 says that if we do not follow after peace with all men, we will not see the Lord. Not seeing the Lord is obviously a loss of salvation. For how can one be in God's Kingdom and not see the Lord? So we have to love our enemies. I see it as a part of loving our neighbor under the New Covenant (or New Testament). Jesus agreed with the lawyer on the truth that loving God, and loving your neighbor is a part of inheriting eternal life (Luke 10:25-28).

Side Note:

Loving our enemies does not mean we have fellowship with them like we do the brethren. For what fellowship does light have with darkness? What this means is that we love them within the confines of not fellowshiping with them like we would the brethren. We can still do good towards our enemies, and pray for them, and love them without fellowshiping with them.

Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said. But the vast majority of those who are on this site do not agree. When I posted my article on why Christians should not celebrate veteran's day the article was taken down and I was accused of flaming. Most Christians just cannot tolerate the idea that they should not kill their enemies, so, is it any wonder that the path is "narrow." These people will flock to the O.T. to find justification to do evil while ignoring the many N.T. verses that we should die for our enemies and not kill them. Spiritual blindness is epidemic! Even this little blurb is guaranteed to draw fire.

Bible Highlighter said:

Yes, the Old Law (i.e. the Torah, or the 613 Laws given to Israel) is no more.

Click to expand...

Hi, Bible Highlighter, thank you for the thought provoking post. I believe that the Law still stands as our tutor to bring us to Christ (Galatians 3:24-25). It is obsolete, though, as a way to be righteous (Hebrews 8:13). The Law reveals our sinful nature and need for Jesus (Romans 2-7).

This does not mean certain "Moral Laws" that existed even before the written Law has not been repeated in the commands given to us in the New Covenant (or New Testament). I believe Matthew 5:24 is the only command that does not apply (in a literal sense) for NT believers because it is talking about the endorsement of animal sacrifices (Which is only for the OT saint or believer).

Click to expand...

I hesitate to separate the Law into moral and civil and ceremonial... James tells us that the Law is a cohesive whole, because if we break one part of it we are guilty of all (James 2:10). However, I do agree that the commands of the NT are many times a restatement of OT laws.

As for Matthew 5:17-20:

Here is my commentary on that passage (if you are interested).

Click to expand...

Yes, I am interested in how you understand this difficult passage!

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil [Jesus did not come to destroy all forms of the Law and prophecy, but He came to fulfill them; Jesus fulfilled Messianic prophecy in many ways by his arrival and Jesus fulfilled the Law by nailing to the cross those ordinances that were against us, like: Circumcision, the Sabbaths, and the dietary laws, etc.; For example: If I took an apple seed and smashed it with a hammer, it would be destroyed, but if I planted that apple seed in the ground, it would be fulfilled into its intended purpose in being an apple tree. Christ brought us a new and better way with His teachings.].

Click to expand...

That is an excellent analogy. I would only add that Christ nailed the WHOLE Law to the cross, and that there are many prophecies yet to be fulfilled.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled [The key to understanding is "till ALL be fulfilled"; Because we clearly know that the law on animal sacrifices does not apply anymore because the temple veil was torn from top to bottom and Jesus is now our Passover Lamb].

Click to expand...

Yes, but we must remember that the entire Law stands as our tutor "until heaven and earth pass away".

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven [I believe the "least of these commandments" is in reference to those commands Jesus gave us on the Sermon on the Mt. that is not attached with any spiritual death warnings or any kind of condemnation by hell fire; One example is the command to "Rejoice and be exceedingly glad" when you are persecuted falsely (See Matthew 5:11-12)]:

Click to expand...

Now we get into the meat of the problem. I appreciate the idea you presented here... but the more I chewed on it the more I felt that it does damage to English grammar. I am not remembering the exact rule, but usually the phrase "these commandments" would refer back to the previous antecedent, not forward. I could be wrong here...

but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven [Don't you want to be called great in the kingdom of Heaven? I sure do. So why not teach the commands on the Sermon on the Mount? I will tell you why? Most do not want to obey Jesus today].

Click to expand...

I want to obey, but I believe that all of the Bible is inspired by the same Holy Spirit, so that one place in the NT will not contradict another. So in this case- based upon Paul's assertion that we are not under Law, but under grace- I ask myself how these two passages (Matthew 5 and Acts 15) should be understood. I am currently formulating my understanding of these two passages, and I have a few vague ideas about how they can be reconciled, but I cannot yet articulate it in a cohesive way.

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. [Our righteous ways or living must exceed the righteous living of the scribes and pharisees, if not we will not enter the kingdom of Heaven; This should not be too hard because they ignored the weightier matters of the Law like love, faith, justice, and mercy - See Matthew 23:23, and Luke 11:42]."
(Matthew 5:17-20) (KJV).

Click to expand...

I agree that our righteousness must be far superior to the Scribes and Pharisees, but I believe that our righteousness is found in Jesus Christ, Who is called "the LORD Our Righteousness" (Jeremiah 23:6; 33:16). Of course we are called to live lives that reflect that righteousness, but this is only out of thankfulness for what Jesus has already done for us. We cannot merit salvation by our works, but our faith will lead us to works of righteousness empowered by the Holy Spirit.

As for the rest of your post, it has challenged my understanding of Christ as living out the righteous requirement of the Law... I did not think He changed the Law, but only corrected the aberrant views of the oral law (traditions of the elders). I am going to have to do more study on this.

Thank you again for this, you have given me a lot to digest. God bless you as you seek to know and obey our Lord Jesus Christ;
Michael

Thank you for taking the time to reply, ViaCrucis.

ViaCrucis said:

One really only has to look at this thread to see examples. The words of Christ our God Himself argued away, He has told us to love others, even our enemies, to turn the other cheek, etc and instead of taking this as the inviolate command of our Lord and King it is taken as being non-applicable, pushed forward to some future period.

Click to expand...

This is what I am wrestling with... I admit this troubles me about dispensationalism. I was not taught this way in the Calvary Chapel movement (I came to faith thru their preaching, but not everything I believe is their doctrine)... they take the words of Christ seriously, too, yet are dispensational in many other ways.

Because the chief article of Dispensationalist theology is that the Gospel is a temporary situation,

Click to expand...

Not so sure about this statement... I haven't read a ton of dispensational writings, so perhaps some have said this, but it is not really what I have been taught. That said, the gospel was not evident during the majority of OT times. What do you think the gospel is (hint, see 1 Corinthians 15)? How could it be the basis for salvation in the OT? They had Genesis 3:15, which is only clear in hindsight. They could expect a bodily resurrection on the last day (Psalms 16:10; Job 19:25-26). They eventually had, long after the Law was given, Isaiah 53. You might have a case for post-Isaiah Israel having an expectation that the Messiah would die for their sins and raise from the dead (although in Jesus' day it was plain that they did not understand this passage), but before Isaiah there was no way for them to know that Messiah would die for their sins and raise from the dead. I cannot see how one could expect pre-Isaiah Israel to know the gospel, so they could not be saved by believing it. And as for beyond the church age, my understanding is that it is the same gospel that will save those who come to faith during the tribulation and in the Millennial Kingdom.

a parenthesis in the divine plan, God's back up plan because Jesus actually failed. At the heart of Dispensationalist teaching is that Jesus came to establish an earthly kingdom, but things went wrong, the Jews did not en masse accept Him as their Messianic King, and so God went with Plan B

Click to expand...

This is a clearly NOT what the dispensationalists I have read teach. Yes, Jesus presented the Kingdom to the nation, and most of them rejected Him. But that was what God knew from all eternity would happen. More importantly, though, dispensationalists I have read DO NOT teach that Jesus failed!!! It was the nation Israel that failed to recognize and receive their Messiah. What you are saying could equally be charged against Jesus in the church age... the vast majority of humanity has not received Christ, does that mean that Christ failed? NO!!! It means the world has failed to receive Him, and to some extent the church has failed to fulfill it's mission. When anyone rejects the gospel, does that mean that Jesus failed? NO!!! It means that person failed to accept their Savior, which God knew they would from all eternity, yet He STILL PRESENTED THE GOSPEL TO THEM!!! In the same way, Jesus presented the Kingdom to Israel and they failed to receive Him, which God knew they would from all eternity. The church is not "plan B", it is the only plan God ever had.

--Jesus would be crucified, resurrected, and God would turn attention to the Gentiles for a season, but only for a season. Eventually God will return to focusing on His real people, the Jews.

Click to expand...

The gentile church is God's real people, also. There will be an innumerable number of people from every tribe, tongue, and nation that will be saved during the tribulation. True, God will once again be dealing with Israel, but not exclusively.

That's precisely why "the Rapture" is necessary, "the Rapture" is ultimately a necessary thing because it gets Christians out of the way so that God can return to working on the Jews as an earthly, national people.

Click to expand...

The rapture is necessary to remove Christ's faithful bride from the earth before He pours out His wrath on a Christ-rejecting world. Also, it is a removal of the main obstacle to the Antichrist coming to power, God's Holy Spirit indwelt church. Also, as I noted above, God will be working in and through the nation of Israel during the tribulation, but not exclusively.

Christ's return in glory is to do what He was supposed to do the first time but failed to do--establish an earthly kingdom focused on earthly Israel, and that's what "the Millennium" is in Dispensationalism.

Click to expand...

Again, Christ did not fail, Israel did. The Bible says that Christ would rule from Jerusalem, so I have no idea why you would object to God keeping His promises...

All of this is a deep, fundamental rejection of Christ, His Gospel, the entire story of redemption in Scripture, of God's grace, of salvation, and of God's word and all His promises from the beginning.

Click to expand...

Most of what you said does not line up with the teaching of the dispensationalists I have read... I suspect, but could be wrong, that you have read what opponents have to say about dispensationalism, not what dispensationalists have to say about it. I hope you can see the problem with that approach. What if I judged the Amillennial view based only off what Premillennialists wrote about it? Wouldn't you think that a mistake, and unfair? If I am wrong about this, I apologize, but what you have said about dispensationalism is mostly a distortion of what I have read about it.

God bless you;
Michael

ViaCrucis said:

The claim isn't that the word "dispensation" can't be found. The claim is that Dispensationalism is false. If I find a word in the Bible and create an entire elaborate false theology around it, that doesn't make my theology correct.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

If you were a Jew during the OT time, you will have to sacrifice an animal to pay for your sins.

Now, you don't have to.

In that way, you are a dispensationalist without even realizing it.

Elohim never required Israel to "pay" for their sins. It was the money changers that carried out the manmade religious traditions of Israel's religious elite. Christianity also has its manmade denominational traditions ... e.g. 16th century RCC indulgences and todays disunty (walls of division) among denominations ... John 13:34-35, John 17:21, 1 John 3:14


Christendom has also strayed (Ezy Seeker-Sensitive Christianity) just as Israel with the result that both Temples being destroyed on the 9th of Av ... What Happened on the Ninth of Av? ... will your temple be destroyed (1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 John 5:20, Matthew 25:1-13)

AbbaLove said:

Elohim never required Israel to "pay" for their sins. It was the money changers that carried out the manmade religious traditions of Israel's religious elite. Christianity also has its manmade denominational traditions ... e.g. 16th century RCC indulgences and todays disunty (walls of division) among denominations ... John 13:34-35, John 17:21, 1 John 3:14

Matthew 7:21-23
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but only the one who does the will of My Father who is in Heaven.
22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?
23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from Me, you evildoers!’​

Christendom has also strayed (Ezy Seeker-Sensitive Christianity) just as Israel with the result that both Temples being destroyed on the 9th of Av ... What Happened on the Ninth of Av? ... will your temple be destroyed (1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 John 5:20, Matthew 25:1-13)

Love the LORD your GOD with all your heart, with all
your soul, and with all your strength.
Deuteronomy 6:5

​

Click to expand...

the rules regarding animal sacrifices are clearly written in the law of Moses.

it began with Cain in genesis 4:7 and it was the basis of why Abel was accepted by God.

you are actually disagreeing with that?