In a Sentence

[ac28]

Danoh.

In the link I gave, I was only interested in those 11 types of dispensationalists he catergorized and must admit I didn't read the whole thing - I should have. In the comments section, I notice he said that Bullinger was the father of Ac28 dispensationalism, a point which I totally disagree with. If anything, Bullinger was closer to a mid-Acts position, in that he thought that all of Paul's 14 books (I think Paul wrote Hebrews) ran together and were of the same (progressive) dispensation.

The main difference between mid-Acts and Ac28 is that that the Ac28 dispensationalists treat Paul's Acts epistles separately from his prison and other post-Acts epistles. The reason being is that Paul's post-Acts epistles obviously show a unique afterlife hope of far above all heavens, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God. This separates Pauls epistles, in that those written during Acts had a hope of the New Jerusalem, the Jewish city that comes down out of Heaven. During Acts, believing Gentiles were grafted into the olive tree, which is Israel. After Acts, Israel doesn't exist in God's eyes, at least temporarily. Everyone today is a Gentile (non-Jew) in God's eyes. That's why the present time is often called a parenthesis.

As far as I know, the first person to see the truth of Paul's Acts and post-Acts being different and separate was Charles H. Welch. I have, or have had (until my son "borrowed" a bunch of them about 10 years ago), hard copies of most all of the books written by both Bullinger and Welch. I use Welch's books constantly. I use the Bullinger books much less frequently and then, never for doctrine, but mainly for word study. Bullinger's Companion Bible (CB) is, by far, the best KJV study Bible on the planet. Except for a few of the Appendices, the CB commentary is mainly word study and not doctrine. Bullinger had only completed John 10 in the CB when he died. As I understand it, Sir Robert Anderson completed the NT in the CB after Bullinger's death. The quality differences are easily noticed and I have gotten to the point where I don't use the CB for anything after John 10.

The only book Bullinger wrote with Acts 28 truth was his last one written before his death, "The Foundations of Dispensational Truth." Near the end of his life, when he finally saw (with Welch's help) that Paul's epistles were of 2 different dispensations, he said, "I guess that scraps about half of what I've written" or something very similar to that.

 

[Danoh]

Romans was written just past midway through Acts. Ephesians and Colossians around and or after Acts 28.

Nevertheless, ALL THREE assert the SAME Mystery.

Romans 15:15 Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God,

Romans 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost. 15:17 I have therefore whereof I may glory through Jesus Christ in those things which pertain to God. 15:18 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, 15:19 Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. 15:20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation: 15:21 But as it is written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand.

By the way, it is passages like verse 21, hereinabove, that throw so many off.

This is because people confuse Paul's application of a principle or general rule of thumb such passages contain.

They take it as an evidence that what Paul is asserting by his quoting such passages; is that his gospel was Prophesied.

But what Paul is actually doing is applying a Dispensational Principle - wherein a principle that is the same in all four Dispensations (Promise; Law; Grace; and Kingdom Fullness) applies differently in each.

Like one difference between Law and Grace, for example. In both systems, God hates transgression.

And yet, what at times constitutes a transgression under the Law (not doing those works the Law commanded, for example) is a transgression under Grace (adding those works under the Law to the Cross).

Paul often writes from this "same, but different" principle.

Anyway, returning back to "the grace of God," Paul mentioned was given him in Rom. 15:15, cited hereinabove...

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

Ephesians 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

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

Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 1:27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: 1:28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:

As for Romans 16:26, since I know you will bring this up...

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, 16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

Verse 26 is referring to Paul's own writings as being "prophetic writings" or, writings uttering "the commandments of the Lord."

Romans 15:15 Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God, 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Ephesians 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

Brother, every aspect of the Acts 28 Position that I have examined, I have found the same gaping hole in...

A logic basically based on first impression, surface level reading of the various passages...

In fact, within Mid-Acts, there is now a group that holds some of the Acts 28 views based on this same error in approach.

But they are married to their understanding and do not wish to explore it. I pm'd one of them; who posts on here, and he basically gave me a cold shoulder, where; prior to this, he and I had always had a decent rapport, more or less, over the years, on this forum.

What is it with Believers that they right off make themselves the issue when approached about exploring differences in understanding?

This, even as they crystal clearly accuse those they do not see eye to eye with as being up to no good.

It has to be this first impression, surface level reading habit of theirs extended by them into their reading of the words of anyone who does not see eye to eye with them.

Lol, as much as the ways of us all continues to fascinate me, at the same time, it continues to crack me up...

 

[random person]

That was my next question. When I went to school, literal was literally. . . literal.

a dispensationalist in a sentence let's scratch 2 thessalonians 1 and ephesians 3:21 from our bibles because we be gone, gooooone...

 

[ac28]

I haven't had time to write a rebuttal to Danoh's arguments.

I will say now that Rom 16 is the mystery of Christ that was hid in the OT scriptures of the prophets, especially in places like Isa 53. The KJV is wrong in using the term "the" mystery. It should be "a" mystery.

THE mystery in Colossians 1:26 was 100% hid from all ages and generations. There isn't even a hint of it in the OT or in the NT, except in Paul's post-Acts epistles.

When you examine Ac28, or any other school of interpretation, through Ac9 eyes, you are bound to see what you think are gaping holes. I do the same thing. Unfortunately, everyone examines scripture based on their existing belief system. I always tell people to leave their denominational baggage at the door when they enter the Bible. However, I must admit that, in this respect, I am as guilty as they are.
___________________________

To me, the #1 most important question is: Do the prison epistles speak of a sphere of blessing (far above all all heavens = heavenly places, where Christ now sitteth at the right hand of God) for today's saved Gentiles that is different than the New Jerusalem? If so, what do you do with this knowledge?
__________________________

I've always thought it would be interesting to have a debate between knowledgeable Ac28ers and Ac9ers. Except, in this debate, the Ac28ers would take the Ac9 position and the Ac9ers would take the Ac28 position. To prepare for the debate, both sides would sure learn a lot.
__________________________

I might mention to all that most of us Ac28ers don't believe that scripture supports the existence of hell or that there's any such thing as an immortal soul. We don't believe that water baptism, the Lord's supper, or the rapture in Thess are for this present age. We also think the comma should be after the words "To day", instead of before, in Lk 23:43, thus eliminating that ridiculous one-verse proof that we immediately go to heaven when we die and thus eliminating the need to wait for the resurrection. And, of course, the New Covenant gifts of the Spirit are long gone, at least for now.

And, finally, there's the infamous Lk 16:19-31, Rich Man and Lazarus, the so-called proof of hell. If you look in Josephus, a Pharisee born a few years after Christ's death, you will find that this whole scenario in Luke is a made up Pharisee tradition, almost word for word as in "An Excerpt From Josephus' Discourse to the Greek Concerning Hades", in the back of the Josephus book. Lk 16:19-31 is a satire, folks. Note that Christ is talking to the Pharisees, vs 14-15. He's ridiculing their beliefs, not teaching them about hell.

I feel that I can prove all these things using scripture

Lot's of ammo to condemn the evils of Acts 28 dispensationalism.