NEW covenant

[bugkiller]

My definitions are not private, my conclusions are private but not uncommon. I err not distinguishing between futurism and Dispensationalism.

FUTURISM AND THE BIBLE And the Origins of Futurism

Welcome to the Web Site of the Historicism Research Foundation.

Then let's say it this way - your definitions are far from the norm and unpublished in dictionaries. I do not discuss the teaching of the futurism movement to my knowledge. I will however discuss dispensationalism.

bugkiller

 

[sparow]

Where is this found - the Law may not be changed?No, neither does Jesus. I think you have misused the word disavow. However I do think Jesus disavowed the 10 Cs with Jn 15:10.I think you are really talking about covenants and not divisions of Scripture. As such Jeremiah said God would do exactly that.

bugkiller

There is nothing in Jn 15:10, or anywhere in chapter 15 that refers directly or indirectly to not keeping the 10 Cs; the opposite is true; you are using your Dispensationalism teaching to reach your conclusion.

 

[sparow]

Then let's say it this way - your definitions are far from the norm and unpublished in dictionaries. I do not discuss the teaching of the futurism movement to my knowledge. I will however discuss dispensationalism.

bugkiller

You have it backwards, while Dispensationalism may be more common lately it has it's own peculiar jargon which people not in the loop do not understand. Dispensationalism only took off since 1900. In around 1937 Ivan Panin a Pentecostal minister said, "Dispensationalism requires a new Gospel, a new Kingdom and a new Bible."


""John Nelson Darby (18 November 1800 – 29 April 1882) was an Anglo-Irish Bible teacher, one of the influential figures among the original Plymouth Brethren and the founder of the Exclusive Brethren. He is considered to be the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism. Pre-tribulation rapture theology was popularized extensively in the 1830s by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren,[1] and further popularized in the United States in the early 20th century by the wide circulation of the Scofield Reference Bible.[2]""

""The eschatology of Futurism is largely credited to the early-mid 19th century interpretation of John Nelson Darby, widely recognized as "the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism", whose eschatological scheme was popularized in the 20th century church through the annotated Scofield Reference Bible. Unique to this eschatology is a "pre-tribulation" "rapture", in which born again believers are to be removed from the world, prior to a seven-year period of great tribulation that is to beset the rest of humanity. Futurism is also "pre-millennial", expecting that Christ will return to rule and reign on earth for a period of a thousand years, in a temple that is to be built on the temple mount in Jerusalem. But is an understanding of apocalyptic prophecy to be gleaned by studying charts and graphs produced by modern-day followers and embellishers of Darby's 19th century doctrine? What might we discover when we look to the scriptures, and those of the former age, as scripture instructs?

It is interesting to note that the approach to eschatology of futurism, necessarily precludes even considering that Muhammad could be the false prophet of the book of Revelation, just as the approach of partial-preterism necessarily precludes the very same. This even though one-quarter of mankind in the world today are required to specifically disbelieve that Christ was crucified and thus reject the blood He shed for us all, and to deny the Son of God, as articles of their faith in the false prophet Muhammad alone. Indeed Muslims are taught that to confess that Jesus is the Son of God or even to pray in Jesus' name, would be to commit the single most "heinous" and only unforgivable sin ("shirk"), in Muhammad's counter-gospel, anti-religion of Islam. It should be no surprise then that Muhammad's followers have been slaughtering and subduing Christians and Jews, and subjugating non-Muslims for 1400 years.

Sections on this page include The "time of the end", History of Futurism in the Church, Futurism VS the Gospel, Jesuit Francisco Ribera, The Revived Roman Empire, the Abomination of Desolation, the "Pre-Trib" "Rapture" and Premillennialism.


You should read the rest of this. I would be interested to know how it fits in with your view of Dispensationalism.

FUTURISM AND DISPENSATIONALISM

 

[bugkiller]

There is nothing in Jn 15:10, or anywhere in chapter 15 that refers directly or indirectly to not keeping the 10 Cs; the opposite is true; you are using your Dispensationalism teaching to reach your conclusion.

What are the commandments of Jesus?

What are His Father's commandments?

What commandments did Jesus confess He kept?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

You have it backwards, while Dispensationalism may be more common lately it has it's own peculiar jargon which people not in the loop do not understand. Dispensationalism only took off since 1900. In around 1937 Ivan Panin a Pentecostal minister said, "Dispensationalism requires a new Gospel, a new Kingdom and a new Bible."


""John Nelson Darby (18 November 1800 – 29 April 1882) was an Anglo-Irish Bible teacher, one of the influential figures among the original Plymouth Brethren and the founder of the Exclusive Brethren. He is considered to be the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism. Pre-tribulation rapture theology was popularized extensively in the 1830s by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren,[1] and further popularized in the United States in the early 20th century by the wide circulation of the Scofield Reference Bible.[2]""

""The eschatology of Futurism is largely credited to the early-mid 19th century interpretation of John Nelson Darby, widely recognized as "the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism", whose eschatological scheme was popularized in the 20th century church through the annotated Scofield Reference Bible. Unique to this eschatology is a "pre-tribulation" "rapture", in which born again believers are to be removed from the world, prior to a seven-year period of great tribulation that is to beset the rest of humanity. Futurism is also "pre-millennial", expecting that Christ will return to rule and reign on earth for a period of a thousand years, in a temple that is to be built on the temple mount in Jerusalem. But is an understanding of apocalyptic prophecy to be gleaned by studying charts and graphs produced by modern-day followers and embellishers of Darby's 19th century doctrine? What might we discover when we look to the scriptures, and those of the former age, as scripture instructs?

It is interesting to note that the approach to eschatology of futurism, necessarily precludes even considering that Muhammad could be the false prophet of the book of Revelation, just as the approach of partial-preterism necessarily precludes the very same. This even though one-quarter of mankind in the world today are required to specifically disbelieve that Christ was crucified and thus reject the blood He shed for us all, and to deny the Son of God, as articles of their faith in the false prophet Muhammad alone. Indeed Muslims are taught that to confess that Jesus is the Son of God or even to pray in Jesus' name, would be to commit the single most "heinous" and only unforgivable sin ("shirk"), in Muhammad's counter-gospel, anti-religion of Islam. It should be no surprise then that Muhammad's followers have been slaughtering and subduing Christians and Jews, and subjugating non-Muslims for 1400 years.

Sections on this page include The "time of the end", History of Futurism in the Church, Futurism VS the Gospel, Jesuit Francisco Ribera, The Revived Roman Empire, the Abomination of Desolation, the "Pre-Trib" "Rapture" and Premillennialism.


You should read the rest of this. I would be interested to know how it fits in with your view of Dispensationalism.

FUTURISM AND DISPENSATIONALISM

A dispensation is a system of order, government, or organization of a nation, community, etc., especially as existing at a particular time.

Thus if you are under the law , you are not under grace. Both are very different systems of order.

bugkiller

 

[sparow]

What are the commandments of Jesus?

What are His Father's commandments?

What commandments did Jesus confess He kept?

bugkiller

What you are demonstrating here is the consequences and disorder of Dispensationalism; I am not a dispensationalist.

 

[bugkiller]

There is nothing in Jn 15:10, or anywhere in chapter 15 that refers directly or indirectly to not keeping the 10 Cs; the opposite is true; you are using your Dispensationalism teaching to reach your conclusion.

I have no idea how that can be said especially on the verse mentioned.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

You have it backwards, while Dispensationalism may be more common lately it has it's own peculiar jargon which people not in the loop do not understand. Dispensationalism only took off since 1900. In around 1937 Ivan Panin a Pentecostal minister said, "Dispensationalism requires a new Gospel, a new Kingdom and a new Bible."


""John Nelson Darby (18 November 1800 – 29 April 1882) was an Anglo-Irish Bible teacher, one of the influential figures among the original Plymouth Brethren and the founder of the Exclusive Brethren. He is considered to be the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism. Pre-tribulation rapture theology was popularized extensively in the 1830s by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren,[1] and further popularized in the United States in the early 20th century by the wide circulation of the Scofield Reference Bible.[2]""

""The eschatology of Futurism is largely credited to the early-mid 19th century interpretation of John Nelson Darby, widely recognized as "the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism", whose eschatological scheme was popularized in the 20th century church through the annotated Scofield Reference Bible. Unique to this eschatology is a "pre-tribulation" "rapture", in which born again believers are to be removed from the world, prior to a seven-year period of great tribulation that is to beset the rest of humanity. Futurism is also "pre-millennial", expecting that Christ will return to rule and reign on earth for a period of a thousand years, in a temple that is to be built on the temple mount in Jerusalem. But is an understanding of apocalyptic prophecy to be gleaned by studying charts and graphs produced by modern-day followers and embellishers of Darby's 19th century doctrine? What might we discover when we look to the scriptures, and those of the former age, as scripture instructs?

It is interesting to note that the approach to eschatology of futurism, necessarily precludes even considering that Muhammad could be the false prophet of the book of Revelation, just as the approach of partial-preterism necessarily precludes the very same. This even though one-quarter of mankind in the world today are required to specifically disbelieve that Christ was crucified and thus reject the blood He shed for us all, and to deny the Son of God, as articles of their faith in the false prophet Muhammad alone. Indeed Muslims are taught that to confess that Jesus is the Son of God or even to pray in Jesus' name, would be to commit the single most "heinous" and only unforgivable sin ("shirk"), in Muhammad's counter-gospel, anti-religion of Islam. It should be no surprise then that Muhammad's followers have been slaughtering and subduing Christians and Jews, and subjugating non-Muslims for 1400 years.

Sections on this page include The "time of the end", History of Futurism in the Church, Futurism VS the Gospel, Jesuit Francisco Ribera, The Revived Roman Empire, the Abomination of Desolation, the "Pre-Trib" "Rapture" and Premillennialism.


You should read the rest of this. I would be interested to know how it fits in with your view of Dispensationalism.

FUTURISM AND DISPENSATIONALISM

In religion yes you are correct. It is the way we discuss the text.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

What you are demonstrating here is the consequences and disorder of Dispensationalism; I am not a dispensationalist.

Maybe you should answer my questions.

bugkiller

 

[sparow]

A dispensation is a system of order, government, or organization of a nation, community, etc., especially as existing at a particular time.

Thus if you are under the law , you are not under grace. Both are very different systems of order.

bugkiller

Got Questions expands your definition;
What is dispensationalism and is it biblical?

""a dispensation is the divine administration of a period of time; each dispensation is a divinely appointed age. Dispensationalism is a theological system that recognizes these ages ordained by God to order the affairs of the world.""

Sounds good but is ridiculous; God uses time periods, He may have created time exclusively for this plan of salvation. I would not use the word "ordain", but the only period of time God has ceremonially attested is the Seventh day which He made Holy and He requires His people keep it Holy.

Dispensationalism is a concoction of men that does not serve God, but dispatches His holy day to history. Under the Law and under grace are systems that have nothing to do with the God of Israel.

 

[sparow]

Maybe you should answer my questions.

bugkiller

<<<What are the commandments of Jesus?

What are His Father's commandments?

What commandments did Jesus confess He kept?>>>

Jesus's commandments are His own/His fathers quoted, paraphrased, fulfilled and applied from the old dispensation Jesus added nothing new except explanation and understanding. He and His father are one and their Law is one.

 

[bugkiller]

Got Questions expands your definition;
What is dispensationalism and is it biblical?

""a dispensation is the divine administration of a period of time; each dispensation is a divinely appointed age. Dispensationalism is a theological system that recognizes these ages ordained by God to order the affairs of the world.""

Sounds good but is ridiculous; God uses time periods, He may have created time exclusively for this plan of salvation. I would not use the word "ordain", but the only period of time God has ceremonially attested is the Seventh day which He made Holy and He requires His people keep it Holy.

Dispensationalism is a concoction of men that does not serve God, but dispatches His holy day to history. Under the Law and under grace are systems that have nothing to do with the God of Israel.

There was a time with no administration of anything.
There was a time with law administrating things.
There is a time of grace administering things.
This is depensationalism even by your definition.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

<<<What are the commandments of Jesus?

What are His Father's commandments?

What commandments did Jesus confess He kept?>>>

Jesus's commandments are His own/His fathers quoted, paraphrased, fulfilled and applied from the old dispensation Jesus added nothing new except explanation and understanding. He and His father are one and their Law is one.

Nope. Care to guess again?

bugkiller

 

[listed]

What are the commandments of Jesus?

What are His Father's commandments?

What commandments did Jesus confess He kept?

bugkiller

Excellent questions that won't be answered.

 

[bugkiller]

Got Questions expands your definition;
What is dispensationalism and is it biblical?

""a dispensation is the divine administration of a period of time; each dispensation is a divinely appointed age. Dispensationalism is a theological system that recognizes these ages ordained by God to order the affairs of the world.""

Sounds good but is ridiculous; God uses time periods, He may have created time exclusively for this plan of salvation. I would not use the word "ordain", but the only period of time God has ceremonially attested is the Seventh day which He made Holy and He requires His people keep it Holy.

Dispensationalism is a concoction of men that does not serve God, but dispatches His holy day to history. Under the Law and under grace are systems that have nothing to do with the God of Israel.

God made that requirement only to Israel.

bugkiller

 

[sparow]

God made that requirement only to Israel.

bugkiller

We are going in circles; God made the requirement with Israel but the strangers within Israel's gates were required to keep the Law and feasts except were specifically excepted such as the gentiles within the gates were allowed to eat things forbidden to Israel, also Gentiles were denied access to the Atonement ceremony, that is they were not offered salvation.

The new covenant is made only with the lost sheep of Israel, with the requirements unchanged, and later extended with the offer of salvation, to the gentiles, the requirements unchanged. God has not made a separate covenant with gentiles.

 

[bugkiller]

We are going in circles; God made the requirement with Israel but the strangers within Israel's gates were required to keep the Law and feasts except were specifically excepted such as the gentiles within the gates were allowed to eat things forbidden to Israel, also Gentiles were denied access to the Atonement ceremony, that is they were not offered salvation.

The new covenant is made only with the lost sheep of Israel, with the requirements unchanged, and later extended with the offer of salvation, to the gentiles, the requirements unchanged. God has not made a separate covenant with gentiles.

Sorry but I read the Gospels and Acts.

bugkiller

 

[1stcenturylady]

I looked up the two verses you quoted and found the did not support your opinion. Quoting verses usually assumes they can stand alone out of the context in which they are given.

It is my opinion that almost every word spoken by Jesus to the Jews was to correct them regarding the old covenant; the rich young man for example:

Matthew 19:17-18 (NKJV)
17 So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."
18 He said to Him, "Which ones?" Jesus said, "'You shall not murder,' 'You shall not commit adultery,' 'You shall not steal,' 'You shall not bear false witness,'

First Jesus tells him to keep all the commandments, none excluded; later Jesus mentions six; you assume six are required for Christians to keep; I assume the six are where the rich young man was failing, and that he had the first four right.

Jesus lived under the OT law. The last 6 are called the royal law, otherwise known as "love your neighbor as yourself."

When Jesus died and the old covenant was finished, "It is finished," the New Covenant came into being for the whole world. It is called by a few names, like the law of the Spirit of life in Christ for the Christian, but for the world, it is called Law of Liberty. It has with it stricter rules.

Instead of outward sins as in the Old Covenant; the Law of Liberty deals with iniquity in the heart. No longer is it just do not murder; it is now do not hate.

 

[sparow]

Jesus lived under the OT law. The last 6 are called the royal law, otherwise known as "love your neighbor as yourself."

When Jesus died and the old covenant was finished, "It is finished," the New Covenant came into being for the whole world. It is called by a few names, like the law of the Spirit of life in Christ for the Christian, but for the world, it is called Law of Liberty. It has with it stricter rules.

Instead of outward sins as in the Old Covenant; the Law of Liberty deals with iniquity in the heart. No longer is it just do not murder; it is now do not hate.

It is an assumption by yourself and your teachers that when Jesus said it is finished He was saying the old covenant is finished; what I read is that it was His crucifixion that was finished; the old covenant is still running it's course, there are still prophesies to be fulfilled.

Regarding the royal law you should read this:

The Royal Law
“If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well” (James 2:8).

- James 2:8–9
One of the temptations to which all human beings are particularly prone is the temptation to view some groups as better than others. It is far too easy to favor some people simply because they have more money or a higher status in the community than others.

This temptation is nothing new. The earliest Christians were also tempted to treat wealthy believers better than poorer ones. In the community that James addressed, the rich were often given preferential treatment despite the fact that it was often wealthy people who shamelessly persecuted the church (James 2:1–7).

Such actions, however, were in violation of James’ exhortation to be doers of the Word (1:22). The original audience that James addressed had professed faith in Christ. But this profession was called into question as they exalted the wealthy believers over the poorer ones. This audience should have known better because they knew the law of God. They should have known that only by truly fulfilling the royal law would they be shown to be true Christians. In showing partiality, they violated this Law (see Lev. 19:15) and thus could possibly have only an empty profession (James 2:8–9).

Today’s passage refers once again to the Law. The last time the Law was mentioned it was called the “law of liberty,” (1:25) and we were exhorted to obey it in order to receive blessing. In 2:8, it is called the “royal law.” In these two titles, James refers to the whole of the law of God, revealed to Moses and then fulfilled in Christ. Christians do well only if they obey the essence of this Law (Matt. 22:36–40).

It is important to note that James is not looking to our obedience as a condition of our salvation. The whole context of chapter 2 makes it clear that our obedience does not accomplish but only evidences our salvation. We will study this in more detail next month. For now we simply note that by showing partiality to the rich, the original audience was revealing that perhaps they were not saved at all. If we do the same and deny the command to love our neighbors as ourselves by showing partiality, then it is possible that we lack God’s grace in our lives.

Coram Deo
The law against showing partiality to the wealthy shows up first in Leviticus 19 (v. 15), the same chapter where we read that we must love our neighbors as ourselves (v. 18). Thus, we can see that treating all of our fellow believers equally regardless of their wealth is a fulfillment of the command to love, upon which hangs the entire Law (Matt. 22:36–40). Ask the Lord to enable you to love your fellow Christians, and look for ways you can express your love for the saints today.

 

[1stcenturylady]

It is an assumption by yourself and your teachers that when Jesus said it is finished He was saying the old covenant is finished; what I read is that it was His crucifixion that was finished; the old covenant is still running it's course, there are still prophesies to be fulfilled.

Regarding the royal law you should read this:

The Royal Law
“If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself,’ you are doing well” (James 2:8).

- James 2:8–9
One of the temptations to which all human beings are particularly prone is the temptation to view some groups as better than others. It is far too easy to favor some people simply because they have more money or a higher status in the community than others.

This temptation is nothing new. The earliest Christians were also tempted to treat wealthy believers better than poorer ones. In the community that James addressed, the rich were often given preferential treatment despite the fact that it was often wealthy people who shamelessly persecuted the church (James 2:1–7).

Such actions, however, were in violation of James’ exhortation to be doers of the Word (1:22). The original audience that James addressed had professed faith in Christ. But this profession was called into question as they exalted the wealthy believers over the poorer ones. This audience should have known better because they knew the law of God. They should have known that only by truly fulfilling the royal law would they be shown to be true Christians. In showing partiality, they violated this Law (see Lev. 19:15) and thus could possibly have only an empty profession (James 2:8–9).

Today’s passage refers once again to the Law. The last time the Law was mentioned it was called the “law of liberty,” (1:25) and we were exhorted to obey it in order to receive blessing. In 2:8, it is called the “royal law.” In these two titles, James refers to the whole of the law of God, revealed to Moses and then fulfilled in Christ. Christians do well only if they obey the essence of this Law (Matt. 22:36–40).

It is important to note that James is not looking to our obedience as a condition of our salvation. The whole context of chapter 2 makes it clear that our obedience does not accomplish but only evidences our salvation. We will study this in more detail next month. For now we simply note that by showing partiality to the rich, the original audience was revealing that perhaps they were not saved at all. If we do the same and deny the command to love our neighbors as ourselves by showing partiality, then it is possible that we lack God’s grace in our lives.

Coram Deo
The law against showing partiality to the wealthy shows up first in Leviticus 19 (v. 15), the same chapter where we read that we must love our neighbors as ourselves (v. 18). Thus, we can see that treating all of our fellow believers equally regardless of their wealth is a fulfillment of the command to love, upon which hangs the entire Law (Matt. 22:36–40). Ask the Lord to enable you to love your fellow Christians, and look for ways you can express your love for the saints today.

This obviously was written by one of your teachers, but I do agree. What prompted James to write about the law of liberty was the preferential treatment given the rich and slighting the poor.