How many dispensations are there?

#1 Dispensation of Innocense
Steward........Adam Gen 2:15
House Rule.....Gen 2:17
Failure...........Gen 3:6
Judgement..... #1 Started to Die Physically and
Spiritually[seperated from God] Gen 3:8
#2 Gen 3:14-24

#2 Dispensation of Consciense
Steward .........Human race?
House Rule...... Conscience will decide to obey God
Failure............#1 Gen 4:8
#2 Gen 6:2-7
Judgement......FLOOD....Gen 7

#3 Dispensation of Human Government
Steward..........Noah ..Gen 8:15
House Rule.......Gen 9:1,5-6
Failure.............#1 Gen 10:9-10
#2 Gen 11:4-5
Judgement........#1 Gen 11:7
#2 Gen 11:9, Gen 10:25

#4 Dispensation of Promise
Steward..........Abram
House Rule......#1 Gen 15:18-21
#2 Gen 17:6-8
#3 Gen 17:10-14
#4 Gen 22:17
Luke 1:68-74
gal 3:15-16,29
1cor 15:57

Failure............Exodus 19:8 we will do
Judgement.......The LAW Exodus 20

#5 Dispensation of Law ...Relgious Government
Steward..........Nation Israel Exodus 34:27-28, Romans 9:4
House Rule.......
Failure.............#1 Romans 10:1-3
#2 Matt 27:19,24
Judgement.......GREAT Tribulation

#6 Dispensation of Grace
Steward........ Church
House Rule.....John 13:34-35.......love as Christ loves you
Failure...........Gal 4:29
Judgement......Rapture

#7 Dispensation of the Kingdom
Steward.........Saved Jews
House Rule......
Failure...........
Judgement.....Rev 20:7-9 Gog and Magog

will add on these empty ones latter

I agree that there are distinct eras in the unfolding of God's redemptive plan, but why set up certain categories, when the Bible already sets forth the "eras
: Covenants?
The 2 most prominent are the Mosaic (Old Cov--Law) and it's fulfillment, the New Cov. The engine on the train would be the Abrahamic where Abr is promised numerous descendants thru whom all the nations of the earth would be blessed. While its important to distinguish Israel from the Church, they must not be separated: Israel are the natural branches that will be grafted in WITH the wild branches in the SAME tree(Rom.9:17ff). Al

Allen2 writes: "While its important to distinguish Israel from the Church, they must not be separated: Israel are the natural branches that will be grafted in WITH the wild branches in the SAME tree(Rom.9:17ff)."

Would you mind elaborating on the above statement? Is it your belief Israel now enjoys, or ever will, the position of the Church in relation to God?

In Christ,
Tracey

Allen2 said:

I agree that there are distinct eras in the unfolding of God's redemptive plan, but why set up certain categories, when the Bible already sets forth the "eras
: Covenants?
The 2 most prominent are the Mosaic (Old Cov--Law) and it's fulfillment, the New Cov. The engine on the train would be the Abrahamic where Abr is promised numerous descendants thru whom all the nations of the earth would be blessed. While its important to distinguish Israel from the Church, they must not be separated: Israel are the natural branches that will be grafted in WITH the wild branches in the SAME tree(Rom.9:17ff). Al

Click to expand...

forth era's???

Galations 3:15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Through it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth[set it aside] or addeth thereto. 16 Now Abram and his seed[Thee Christ] were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Gal 3 :29 And if ye be Christ's then are ye Abramham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

First Question is who were those 4 covantants written too.
Gen 15:18 with Abram land
Gen Gen 17:6 with Abram exceedingly fruitful,nations, kings
Gen 17:10 with Abram circumcised
These three covanents are for Israel as a nation.

Gen 22:17 Seed shall possess the gate of their enemies
No one received this as proven in Matt 6:6-18
look at verse 13 and lead us not into tempation but deliver us from evil: ............................

compared to James 1:2 My Brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into various tempations;
James is showing us that we are able to stop are enemies from seperating us from are God

and when you do not divide the word it will look like the bible contradicts unless you do divide it and show how God never Changes but does Change how he deals with things and what he is teaching us and other spirit beings

On not seperating Israel and the Church

God Seperate us [1cor 10:32 Give none offense, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God:].............so why not

Israel promised Land

Church promise to be the Bride to Christ always next to him

much better promises!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THANKS to be the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit

God has not abandoned His ancient covenant people, Israel, in spite of their unbelief. One day they will return to the Lord and His Messiah in faith. However, if we put the Church and the people of Israel on two separate tracks, we have two problems:
A. God originally included the Gentiles when He made the Cov with Abr:"I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great...and all peoples on earth will be blessed thru you", Gen.12:2-3.
B.Paul unveils God's previously secret plan to put Jew and Gentile into ONE people:"This [unveiled secret] is that thru the Gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Isr, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus", Eph.3:6. Notice the repetition of the word, "together", which stresses that Jews and Gen will be on an equal footing in ONE body.
So what about the land promises? Will Israel have a special role in the New Heaven and New Earth? I dunno...whaddaya think, Al

Allen2 said:

God has not abandoned His ancient covenant people, Israel, in spite of their unbelief. One day they will return to the Lord and His Messiah in faith. However, if we put the Church and the people of Israel on two separate tracks, we have two problems:
A. God originally included the Gentiles when He made the Cov with Abr:"I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great...and all peoples on earth will be blessed thru you", Gen.12:2-3.

Click to expand...

Question=How would the nations be BLESSED thru you.........
ANSWER Jesus Christ came and DIED FOR YOUR SINS , AROSE ON THIRD DAY , AND IN THE FLESH SITTING BY THE FATHER'S RIGHT HAND.........

Only Covenant for the CHURCH

Gen 22:17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the star of heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess then gate of His Enemies

question=why is this a covenant Luke 1:68-74
ANSWER= God's word says so

QUESTION=Who are his enemies?
ANSWER=Satan, world, and the flesh

QUESTION =Did the Jews recieve this promise or did the church

ANSWER= church

Galation 3:15 Brethren I speak after the manner of men; through it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth[set aside] or addeth thereto. 16 Now to Abraham and his seedwere the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise

Only the #4 covenant because God did not give a way of victory over their[jews] enemies that he[church] gave us

Allen2 said:

B.Paul unveils God's previously secret plan to put Jew and Gentile into ONE people:"This [unveiled secret] is that thru the Gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Isr, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus", Eph.3:6. Notice the repetition of the word, "together", which stresses that Jews and Gen will be on an equal footing in ONE body.
So what about the land promises? Will Israel have a special role in the New Heaven and New Earth? I dunno...whaddaya think, Al

Click to expand...

1peter 2:10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy.

Romans 11:25 .....that blindness in part is happened to Israel , until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

colossians 3:11 Where there is neither Gentile nor Jew , circumcision nor uncircumsim, Barbarian or educated, slave nor rich: but Christ is all and in all

1Cor 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews[God's holy nation]
nor to the Gentiles
nor to the church of God [God's holy people...both Jew and Gentile that have beleived in Jesus Christ]

Differences YES if you don't see it I am sorry


during the dispensation of Law they are promised the NEW EARTH and bride to the Father
during the dispensation of Grace they are promised to be the bride of Christ

if you want verses respond

In short no Israel is not seperated out and both are together. There is no land promises that are in need of fulfillment as all was fulfilled in Christ.
Jeff the Finn

NO ........

during the kindom Israel will recieve the land and resurect King David to reign on earth below Christ during the 1000 years But the church[bride] will help with Christ make discision from Heaven..

very different

Jer. 1:12 I watch over my word to perform it.

Number 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, neither the son of man, that he sould repent: hath he said,and shall he not do it? or he hath spoken, and shall he not make it good.


2tim 3:16
Jerimiah 36
2 peter1:19-21
Romans 15:4

here is a difference the CHURCH gets raptured Jew and Gentile that is saved IN CHRIST
But during the GREAT TRIBULATION the 70th week in Daniel aka last 7 years of LAW..JEW ....thank GOD that I will not be there
1cor 15:51-53

Ro 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by HIS blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him

1thes 1:10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he Raised from the dead, evan Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

1thes 5:2-6

2 thes 1:3-7

The Historic Church does not believe in a literal 1000 year reign.
Jeff the Finn

2tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for corrections, for instruction in righteousness:

2 peter 1:19 We have also a sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that sineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Jeremiah 36:2 ...........written therein all the words ......
jer 36:4 .....all the words of the Lord
jer 36:6 .....which thou hast written from my mouth
jer 36:8 .....reading in the book the words of the Lord in the Lord's house
Jer 36:10 in the book of words of Jerimiah
Jer 36:11 ..all the words of the Lord
jer 36 13 all the words
jer 36:16 all the words

John 1:1 In the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

NUMBERS 23:19"God will not lie" paraphrase

1cOR 1:9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

roman 3:4 God forbid: yea, God be true, but everyman a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy savings, and might overcome when you judged.


If God says I believe it

were did the Church get the bible verse to prove that quote from jeffthefinn

Or did they not like how God word held up to their doctrine?................

jeffthefinn writes: "The Historic Church does not believe in a literal 1000 year reign."

I'm not as interested in the "historic Church" as I am in the beleifs of the Early Church (EC) and Scripture shows they held a chiliastic interpretation.

I'll show a couple of passages that indicate the EC to be either directly or indirectly chiliastic in the view it held.

(Acts 15:1-29). This Scripture deals with the calling of the first council of the Church and its findings. The problem before the council, which was totally Jewish, was the fact the gospel had moved beyond them and now had reached Gentiles. By doing so this placed the gospel completely outside the bounds of Judaism. Since the Jewish religion called for the seperation from Gentiles, a fact determined by God Himself, a solution had to be found for the abandonment of one of the fundamental features in Judaism. More importantly what had happened to the unchangeable divine covenants made with the nation?

James declares what was evidently the answer to the problem and what was accepted by the Church as a whole. "And after they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, Brethren, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written, After these things I will return, and I will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen, and I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, in order that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by My Name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from old" (Acts 15:13-18).

"After this," James asserts, the Lord will return and build again the tabernacle of David, David's kingly line, and according to the covenant made with David (2 Sam. 7:1-17) set it up. Though men didn't know this, God has know it from the foundation of the world. The council was simply realizing the new divine purpose (the calling out from both Jew and Gentile a peculiar company called the Church) and recognizing the postponement of the earthly kingdom.

The above alone shows that a chiliastic belief was adopted by the first Church council.

(Romans chapters 9-11). A total analysis won't be done, but Paul's conclusion can be cited. Chapter 11 opens with the question, "...God has not rejected His people, has He?" Paul's inspired answer is, "May it never be!" At the end of the chapter Paul asserts that a blindness has been imposed on Israel as a nation that serves as a judgment, and continues until the "fulness of the Gentiles" has come in (11:25). Then the "Deliverer will come from Zion and He will remove ungodliness from Jacob" (11:26). All of this is in accordance with covenants Jehovah made with Israel. He will take away their sins and all Israel will be saved.

Again, this shows that the EC held chiliastic beliefs. The Church today is hardlly in a position to repudiate what the EC believed, that which was received from the Apostles.

In Christ,
Tracey

A Brethren In Christ,

I will give a quick example regarding the issue of 1000 years being taken literally.

In Psalm 50:10 we see the expression that God owns all the cattle on 1000 hills. Now do we believe that God only owns cattle on 1000 hills or do we believe that He is the Creator and owner of all creation. I believe we both would choose the later; we see the statement as symbolic of God's possesions as Sovereign Lord. So when we read in an Apocalyptic book of 1000 years, is it literal or symbolic? The Book of Revelation is a highly symbolic book and so why do we interpret it literalistically? When we would not interpret Rev. 5:6 Christ as being an acutal lamb with seven horns and seven eyes. Why? Because we understand it as being symbolic

I too once was a premillenial dispensationalist. But as I began to study the Scripture and the role that Christ plays in it, I began to understand prophecy and the interpretation of it more clearly. Dispensationalists look at the New Testament throught the lense of the Old Testament. But the Apostles and early Christians used the New Testament to view the Old Testament because Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Therefore we must learn to interpret the Old Testament in light of the New Testament in order to gain a grasp on eschatology.

A book you might be interested in reading is "A Case for Amellinialsim:Understanding the Endtimes" by Dr. Kim Riddlebarger. Dr. Riddlebarger also used to hold to dispensational theology and even taught it until further study of Scripture. He does an excellent job of examining key passages of Scripture that deal with prophecy: Daniel's Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks, The Olivet Discourse, Romans 11, and Revelation 20. He also takes you through Scripture to examine such subjects as: Christ's Role in the Fulfillment of Prophecy, The Kingdom of God, etc.

I hope this is somewhat helpful as to understanding what Jeff the Finn was trying to say. I do not have the right to speak on his behalf but I wanted to try and clear some things up. The main belief of the body of Christ over the years has been amillenialism. I believe that it is the belief of the Roman Catholic Church and was also the view of the majority of Protestant Reformers. Now there are other views such as dispensationalism, preterism (full and partial), historic dispensationalism, and postmillenialsim. But I hope that you take the time to study eschatology through more than one "system"; you may change your mind, but then again you may remain the same. But it will do a great good for yourself to test any systematic teaching with Scripture and leaving behind all presuppositions as we approach the text.

I hate to do this but I want to ask this question before I forget about it. I want to take one of your texts cited that supposedly speak of the rapture. If we were to read 1 Corinthians 15:51-53 without the presupposition of the premillenial dispentsationalism view, would we believe Christ's second coming to be a secret Rapture that only Christians hear and partake in? Or would we think that it would be a universal event, due to such language as "the last trumpet will sound"? And by universal I am not implying universalism, but that the trumpet of God would be heard by all and not just Christians.


God Bless

Jesaiah

duster1az said:

jeffthefinn writes: "The Historic Church does not believe in a literal 1000 year reign."

I'm not as interested in the "historic Church" as I am in the beleifs of the Early Church (EC) and Scripture shows they held a chiliastic interpretation.

I'll show a couple of passages that indicate the EC to be either directly or indirectly chiliastic in the view it held.

(Acts 15:1-29). This Scripture deals with the calling of the first council of the Church and its findings. The problem before the council, which was totally Jewish, was the fact the gospel had moved beyond them and now had reached Gentiles. By doing so this placed the gospel completely outside the bounds of Judaism. Since the Jewish religion called for the seperation from Gentiles, a fact determined by God Himself, a solution had to be found for the abandonment of one of the fundamental features in Judaism. More importantly what had happened to the unchangeable divine covenants made with the nation?

James declares what was evidently the answer to the problem and what was accepted by the Church as a whole. "And after they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, Brethren, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written, After these things I will return, and I will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen, and I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, in order that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by My Name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from old" (Acts 15:13-18).

"After this," James asserts, the Lord will return and build again the tabernacle of David, David's kingly line, and according to the covenant made with David (2 Sam. 7:1-17) set it up. Though men didn't know this, God has know it from the foundation of the world. The council was simply realizing the new divine purpose (the calling out from both Jew and Gentile a peculiar company called the Church) and recognizing the postponement of the earthly kingdom.

The above alone shows that a chiliastic belief was adopted by the first Church council.



Again, this shows that the EC held chiliastic beliefs. The Church today is hardlly in a position to repudiate what the EC believed, that which was received from the Apostles.

In Christ,
Tracey

Click to expand...

Actually it was not James who made the statement "After these" in Acts 15:13-18, but rather James was quoting from an Old Testament passage. James was quoting the prophet Amos (Amos 9:11,12). James is speaking on the issue of Gentile believers and he states that God promised through His prophets that He would make a people for His name out of the Gentile nations also, and not just the Jewish people. To prove this James quotes Amos 9:11,12 and declares that Christ is the fulfillment of this prophecy. For it is through the preaching of the Gospel of Christ that Gentiles are made children of God. Therefore this passage does not support a chiliastic view for Christ, through the Gospel, has rebuilt the tents of David. And this is proved by the conversion of Gentiles.


God Bless

Jesaiah

duster1az said:

jeffthefinn writes: "The Historic Church does not believe in a literal 1000 year reign."

I'm not as interested in the "historic Church" as I am in the beleifs of the Early Church (EC) and Scripture shows they held a chiliastic interpretation.

Click to expand...

The Nicene Creed states He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; whose Kingdom shall have no end. There is one Second Coming and not 2. The faith of the Church has always been that Christ's Kingdom is not of this world. Yet in these latter days all we hear about is earthly kingdoms. As far as the early Church, some may have felt there was a 1000 year reign but that was a private opinion, and I know you will see that after Nicea no Church Father held that belief, as it was heresy. Now even those who did were not Darbyites and there was no escape from martyrdom in the Tribulation. It has only been since the Scofield Reference Bible that the theory of dispensationalism has gained followers. Prior to 1830 in Scotland, no one had even believed anything close to what Darby and Scofield are saying.
Jeff the Finn

In the thread the Scofield Reference Bible in the Protestant, Reformed, and Evangelical Room there is my comment about at least some of what Scofield taught. Is that what you also believe that the Sermon on the Mount does not apply to the Church?
Jeff the Finn

Jesaiah writes: "Actually it was not James who made the statement "After these" in Acts 15:13-18, but rather James was quoting from an Old Testament passage."

I believe I made that clear in my post: James answered, saying, Brethren, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written,

Jesaiah writes: "Therefore this passage does not support a chiliastic view for Christ, through the Gospel, has rebuilt the tents of David. And this is proved by the conversion of Gentiles."

What has become of the oath sustained Israelitish covenants? You must answer that question so the present heavenly purpose of God isn't confused with the earthly purpose which is expressed in all of His dealings with Israel. One thing is clear; the Jewish covenants are not being fulfilled in the present age. What has become of the covenants? To say that God has changed His mind or has withdrawn the promises of a literal earthly kingdom ignores Scripture and dishonors God.

In Christ,
Tracey

duster1az said:

What has become of the oath sustained Israelitish covenants? You must answer that question so the present heavenly purpose of God isn't confused with the earthly purpose which is expressed in all of His dealings with Israel. One thing is clear; the Jewish covenants are not being fulfilled in the present age. What has become of the covenants? To say that God has changed His mind or has withdrawn the promises of a literal earthly kingdom ignores Scripture and dishonors God.

In Christ,
Tracey

Click to expand...

What oath?

The promise made to Israel was fulfilled in Christ, that is the gist of the cursing of the fig trees they did not bear fruit. St Paul calls the Church the Israel of God, I do not know of another Israel.
Jeff the Finn

Jeffthefinn writes: "The Nicene Creed states He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; whose Kingdom shall have no end."

I've got no problem with the above statement in the Creed. But the statement lends itself more to the judgments than anything else. Notice it doesn't say when those judgments take place, it just says they'll happen. Scripture states that when Christ returns after the tribulation to set up His kingdom He will gather the nations together for judgment (Matt. 25:31-46). After 1000 years, in the literal earthly kingdom, (Rev. 20:6) the judgment of the wicked takes place (Rev. 20:11-15).

It doesn't offend me that you disagree with my study of the Bible from a dispensational point of view. I believe it must be studied in this way to avoid confusion and to have continuity.

jeffthefinn writes: "In the thread the Scofield Reference Bible in the Protestant, Reformed, and Evangelical Room there is my comment about at least some of what Scofield taught. Is that what you also believe that the Sermon on the Mount does not apply to the Church?"

I don't own a Scofield Bible, so I can't respond to what it states, but I believe the Sermon on the Mount is the expansion of the full meaning of the personal righteousness that is required in the literal kingdom. But, just because I believe the literal interpretation of the Sermon was addressed to Israel in anticipation of their earthly kingdom, it doesn't mean I believe the Church can't benefit from portions of it through a secondary application.

In Christ,
Tracey

Jesaiah writes: "What oath?"

Jehovah made oath-bound covenants with Abraham and with David. Not only are these covenants unconditional and binding by the very terms by which they are declared, but subsequent Scriptures reaffirm these promises.

The Abrahamic covenant records Jehovah's sovereign purpose in, through, and for Abraham. The covenant is unconditional in that no obligation is imposed on Abraham; he contributes nothing, but is the recipient of all that Jehovah proposes to do for him (Gen. 12:1-3; 13:14-17; 15:4-7; 17:1-8).

The Davidic covenant reveals the nature of the literal earthly kingdom (2 Sam. 7:12-17, Ps. 89:1-37). The literal nature of the covenant is both explicit and extended. Difficulty only comes about when some are determined to metamorphose a literal, earthly kingdom into some vague and totally imaginary spiritual idealism.

In Christ,
Tracey