Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I do not agree that Pentecost was a classical dispensationalist. The classical dispensationalists were John Nelson Darby and his close associate, William Kelly.
As to my 'teachers' -- I didn't have any one teacher. I was raised in a dispensational home, and grew up hearing and being taught pretty much everything you, et al (with the exception of Terral and his ilk), describe on this and other threads.
BibleWriters Reply >> I think very few even read his posts anymore. They are always long and complicated, and show a very bad attitude. When I do read an occasional one, I am amused by his continual references to dispensationalism as a "denomination."
Darby is credited with starting a new denomination designed to conform to New Testament church principles in conjunction with the Brethren movement (here) if anybody is interested. Here (link) is a leadershipfoundation.org article about how a close friend and I formed a new denomination entitled The Reformed Dispensational Baptists, which became an offshoot of an already-existing denomination that adopted the Darby Dispensationalism Model. New denominations pop up all the time, which is the reason that the USA has over 2000 denominations of professing Christians. BTW, I am also amused by the way many professing Dispys toss around the Age of Grace (Grace Age in OP of this thread) lingo, when nothing like that appears in your Bible anywhere and no such things even exists. :0)Dispensationalism:
The movement towards Fundamentalism began in the early 19th century in Great Britain, and was called dispensationalism. The first Dispensationalists were called the Plymouth Brethren and were led by John Nelson Darby, an Irish priest. The Brethren were tired of the traditionalism of the Anglican (and Catholic) Church, and founded a new denomination in which all were welcome, there was no caste of clergy, and there was no special order of service (the idea was to let the Holy Spirit lead the service). The denomination was called Dispensationalism because it divided time into 7 periods, or dispensations . . .
Hi Benefactor and TheScottsMen:Tribulation Saints? What In The Heck Is That? :0)
In Christ Jesus,
Terral
I wrote on this topic in Post #24 (here) back in 2007 where we find that others agree with my view:
Mtholyoke.edu
Dispensationalism:
The movement towards Fundamentalism began in the early 19th century in Great Britain, and was called dispensationalism. The first Dispensationalists were called the Plymouth Brethren and were led by John Nelson Darby, an Irish priest. The Brethren were tired of the traditionalism of the Anglican (and Catholic) Church, and founded a new denomination in which all were welcome, there was no caste of clergy, and there was no special order of service (the idea was to let the Holy Spirit lead the service). The denomination was called Dispensationalism because it divided time into 7 periods, or dispensations . . .
Darby is credited with starting a new denomination designed to conform to New Testament church principles in conjunction with the Brethren movement (here) if anybody is interested. Here (link) is a leadershipfoundation.org article about how a close friend and I formed a new denomination entitled The Reformed Dispensational Baptists, which became an offshoot of an already-existing denomination that adopted the Darby Dispensationalism Model. New denominations pop up all the time, which is the reason that the USA has over 2000 denominations of professing Christians. BTW, I am also amused by the way many professing Dispys toss around the Age of Grace (Grace Age in OP of this thread) lingo, when nothing like that appears in your Bible anywhere and no such things even exists. :0)
Hi Benefactor and TheScottsMen:Tribulation Saints? What In The Heck Is That? :0)
Benefactor’s Reply >> 6. Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven.
7. And it was granted to him to make war with the SAINTS to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.
8. And all who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
9. If anyone has an ear, let him hear.
God gathered Peter’s “Early Rains” Kingdom “Bride” (John 3:29 = Church #1 here) 2000 years ago through the ministry of John the Baptist, Christ and the Twelve (diagram = yellow, red and blue) preaching the “Gospel of the Kingdom” (Gospel #1 here), until the Kingdom Dispensation was “cut off” (Rev. 20:4 = pelekizo #3990 = mistranslated 'beheaded') during the “Dispensational Shift” (diagram) where God began calling the members of “Christ’s Body” (Church #2 = that's us) through Paul’s “Word of the Cross” (Gospel #2) and Peter’s Bride began to ‘decrease.’ We saw the same decrease with John the Baptist (John 3:30), when Jesus Christ received the Holy Spirit from him in the Jordan River at His baptism (Matt. 3:15-16) where Christ began to ‘increase.’“Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, "These who are clothed in the white robes, who are they, and where have they come from?" I said to him, "My lord, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the Great Tribulation [Matt. 24:21], and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. For this reason, they are BEFORE THE THRONE; and they serve Him day and night in His temple; and He who sits on the throne will spread His tabernacle over them. They will hunger no longer, nor thirst anymore; nor will the sun beat down on them, nor any heat . . .”. Revelation 7:13-16.
SK,
I find that a lot of believers share your concern about the tribulation saints. If I understand you correctly you believe that Dispensatonalist teach that the Jews after the rapture revert back to OT Law.
I don't care where you explained your view, or who agrees with you, dispensationalism is, by definition, an "ism." A denomination is a specific group organized for a specific purpose. Many different denominations believe in the "ism" of dispensationalism. But an ism is not an organized group.
John Edwards A Calvinist held to 6 dispensations 1637 -1716
those blinded by the false teachings of Dispensationalism will have no better fate than those pushing their Roman Catholicism and doing the very same things.
The Reformed use of the term 'dispensation' (a biblical term of course) is somewhat different from the way that Dispensationalists use it. Edwards and Hodge used the term dispensation to denote different administrations of the covenant of grace.
But to a dispensationalist, a 'dispensation" simply means an "administration." When Christians debate, they often discover that they are simply calling the same ideas by different names.I've tried to point that out several timesl. Thank you!
I do not expect (or desire) Dispensationalists to quickly or easily cave in on their views; I do hope to engage some in productive discussions.
My experience both as a Dispensaionalist, and in dialog with them over many years shows a radical inability to get out of their own hermeneutical box and objectively consider opposing views.
Many (if not most) of my posts are simply directed to that end and nothing more -- to promote discussion on the issue of the different hermeneutical approaches used by Dispensationalists and Covenant Theologians.
All along I had taken it for granted that the critical assessments I read in Pentecost, Walvoord, et al, were accurate portrayals of Covenantal A-, Post- and Pre-mil eschatologies. In that I was greatly mistaken. O.T. Allis, O. Palmer Robertson, Charles Hodge, and many others have been consistently and repeatedly misrepresented in some of the most scholarly of Dispensational writing.
It is my disappiontment and frustration over this that, at times, leads me to post more provocative or incendiary statements rather than more carefully crafted and edifying ones; for that I apologize to you and all other readers of this thread and forum. I will strive to do better in the future, but do ask all to be patient. Not everything can be said in one post, no matter how much one may try.
I beg to differ -- unfortunately, I don't have the time to research the issue again right now, but it is most certainly a fact that some Dispensationalists have taught exactly this. I know this is not a satisfactory answer, but it is all I have time for right now.
Those who believe in salvation by grace through faith alone, without works even being involved, have a fate of heaven with the Lord Jesus Christ. All others have a fate of the lake of fire with the Devil and his angels.
Peter is preaching the same water baptism for salvation (1Peter 3:21) that John the Baptist preached from the very beginning! Mark 1:4-5. Water baptism by a human being IS . . . A . . . WORK. Period!“Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized [Mark 16:15-16] in the name of Jesus Christ [‘the Son’ = Kingdom Baptism #2 = Matt. 28:19] for the forgiveness of your sins [Mark 1:4-5]; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Acts 2:38.
Water baptism IS A WORK, just like ‘circumcision’ (Acts 15:1+5), that Paul battled against at the famous meeting in Jerusalem (Acts 15/Gal 2) where he was sent up to Jerusalem to ‘submit THE GOSPEL (#2) that I preach among the Gentiles’ to the same Peter and John (Gal. 2:9) that have been preaching the “Gospel of the Kingdom” for twenty cotton-picking years!!! You take Paul’s “Gospel of the Grace of God” (Acts 20:24 = Gospel #2) and add that to “Preaching The Kingdom” (Acts 20:25 = Gospel #1) and pretend these “Two Gospels” are combined together for creating ‘your one gospel MYTH.’ Then you say that ‘repentance’ is not a work and ‘confession of sins’ is not a work and that water baptism by a human being is not a work and laying of hands for the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:17, 19:6) is not a work, so these WORKS can then become part of your one gospel MYTH; when in truth the power of the cross has already been made VOID and the Majority here have already inherited the ‘deluding influence’ and will continue believing ‘what is false’ (2Thes. 2:11) no matter what anyone says in these deliberations.“For Christ DID NOT send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel [#2], not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would NOT be made VOID. For the Word of the Cross [Gospel #2] is foolishness to those who are perishing [2Cor. 4:3-4, 2Peter 3:14-16], but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” 1Corinthians 1:17-18.
If these Samarians heard (Rom. 10:17) and believed (Eph. 1:13-14) our gospel for today (#2), they would have received the Holy Spirit ‘by hearing with faith’ (Gal. 3:2) at the moment they believed in Acts 8:12 and NO WORKS would be required! We see the same ‘three baptism’ process in Acts 19:1-6 where Paul is helping these ‘disciples’ to receive Kingdom Baptism #2 (Acts 19:5) and Kingdom Baptism #3 (Acts 19:6) in the same exact way that Peter and John are helping the Samarians receive the Holy Spirit by the LAYING OF HANDS in Acts 12:17 BY WORKS.“. . . For He [the Holy Spirit] had not yet fallen upon any of them; they had simply been baptized [John’s Baptism #1] in the name of the Lord Jesus [Kingdom Baptism #2]. Then they [Peter and John] began laying their hands on them [yet another WORK], and they were receiving the Holy Spirit [Kingdom Baptism #3].” Acts 8:16-17.
Peter’s Kingdom “Bride” (Church #1) is very much under Mosaic Law ‘and’ MUST ‘keep the commandments’ to obtain eternal life! Matthew 19:16-17. Now let us revisit Biblewriter’s statement to see where Peter, John and James fit into ‘his’ interpretations:“But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted BY THE LAW as transgressors. For whoever keeps THE WHOLE LAW and yet stumbles in one point [Matt 5:17-19], he has become guilty of all.” James 2:9-10.
Those who believe in salvation by grace through faith alone, without works even being involved, have a fate of heaven with the Lord Jesus Christ. All others have a fate of the lake of fire with the Devil and his angels.
The Reformed use of the term 'dispensation' (a biblical term of course) is somewhat different from the way that Dispensationalists use it. Edwards and Hodge used the term dispensation to denote different administrations of the covenant of grace.
I've tried to point that out several timesl. Thank you!
But to a dispensationalist, a 'dispensation" simply means an "administration."
When Christians debate, they often discover that they are simply calling the same ideas by different names.
What food rule does one follow?
Gen 2:16-17.. adam and eve
Gen 9:3-4... Noah
Lev 11:1-47.. the Jews
1 tim 4:3-5, romans 14:20-23, 1 cor 8:12 the church gal 3:28
If it offends a brother... we are to not to eat it... basically love your brother.. john 13:34-35 as a servant
If an unbeliever invites you over to eat ANYTHING, then eat anything that is set before you. Period. Again, the context here concerns meat sacrificed to Aphrodite in Pauls day some 2000 years ago with little or no application to the typical member of Christs Body in the world today. If you invite a practicing Jew over for barbecue pork ribs and chitin's, then there might be a problem. :0) These food commands generally have more application to the Jewish members of Christ Body than anybody else. The Jewish member of Christs Body can eat anything like the Gentile members, but eating pork and other forbidden foods in front of unbelieving Jews can ruin the Jewish believers testimony and his ability to lead other Jews to Christ through our gospel. Paul sums up the teaching very well in the preceding chapter:For the earth is the Lord's, and all it contains. If one of the unbelievers invites you and you want to go, eat anything that is set before you without asking questions for conscience' sake. But if anyone says to you, "This is meat sacrificed to idols," do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for conscience' sake . . .. 1Corinthians 10:27-28.
If you are a Jewish convert to Christianity by Gods calling through our gospel (2Thes. 2:13-14), then winning those under Mosaic Law requires the believer to maneuver through a minefield of potential problems requiring you to be as a Jew to win Jews. Otherwise, the typical Gentile member of Christs Body (like these readers) has NO ONE as their judge over matters of food and drink and even keeping the Sabbath (Col. 2:16-17).For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it. 1Corinthians 9:19-23.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?