Guojing
Well-Known Member
I don't really think it matters to be honest. That is what I mean by dispensationalism makes errors. I mean who cares when the church started? If dispensationalists are fighting over this, all the more to move away from that. I presume the whole reason for the debate, is to chop of the various gospels in the new testament at various points, and to know when grace came. But we know grace came with Christ, it says so. I would go further and say that all those who believed in Christ (even before the cross but during Christ's ministry) were saved by grace. But a dispensationalist may even put them under law, I don't know. But it's endless debates over nothingness that made me realize I could never be hyper dispensationalist, or even classic dispensationalist. If anything I am a soft dispensationalist, but I am not sure if I want to be associated at all with it. The more I talk to you. I think I am just a Bible believer who believes there are various ages in scripture. Call it dispensation, or age, or covenant, it does not matter to me.
Let me give you an example why it matters.
If you are Acts 2, you will also believe that it is possible for certain sins a Christian can commit, to be punished by death from God, aka Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5.
That means, we are not in the age of grace yet, where sin is not imputed to the believer because he is not under law (Romans 5:13).
Upvote
0