Personally, I see how Reformed, or Covenant Theology, and various off-shoots sees things as deformed, if not, still-born, notions - consider the following, for example:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7804545/
Clearly, they start off from a premise never fully allowed the process of inductive study before allowing themselves to accept its resulting premise (which they then deduce from it what they do).
Note how that what further information a bit more inductive study (information gathering and analysis) might have resulted in a much more fully informed premise is sacrificed in favor of just the information the text they cite alone provides.
This what goes for their "reasoning." Never mind the additional information of Acts 3 and Acts 15. And that is just two of countless many more.
I post this here in the Dispensational forum that those of my fellow Dispensationalists see how these people arrive at their anti-Dispensational notion.
Their main method of study is mysticism - where what is actually literal is not literal at all. Rather, it holds some "spiritual" truth.
Its one thing to see a figure of speech when it is a figure of speech, but quite another when is not.
Its as if, while having a conversation with these people, while relating that, as regards your recent job inteview as a baseball player, you relate that you struck out, they conclude you "are not really talking about baseball, that's just a figure of speech."
As some of us know, there is no reasoning with such. In their case, they actually do throw out the baby, with the bath water...
I mean, just reading Acts 2 alone tells you that the Spirit speaking through Peter has so connected the sense of His words to Joel's prophecy about the Lord's PHYSICAL return IN HIS WRATH against that nation, that Acts 2 goes on to relate that "they were pricked in their heart" about it - in short, they freaked out at the very thought that Israel's PROPHESIED "last days" were just around the corner (but for that later revelation of Romans 11:25-29l, their "last days" had been that at their door!!!)
http://www.christianforums.com/t7804545/
Clearly, they start off from a premise never fully allowed the process of inductive study before allowing themselves to accept its resulting premise (which they then deduce from it what they do).
Note how that what further information a bit more inductive study (information gathering and analysis) might have resulted in a much more fully informed premise is sacrificed in favor of just the information the text they cite alone provides.
This what goes for their "reasoning." Never mind the additional information of Acts 3 and Acts 15. And that is just two of countless many more.
I post this here in the Dispensational forum that those of my fellow Dispensationalists see how these people arrive at their anti-Dispensational notion.
Their main method of study is mysticism - where what is actually literal is not literal at all. Rather, it holds some "spiritual" truth.
Its one thing to see a figure of speech when it is a figure of speech, but quite another when is not.
Its as if, while having a conversation with these people, while relating that, as regards your recent job inteview as a baseball player, you relate that you struck out, they conclude you "are not really talking about baseball, that's just a figure of speech."
As some of us know, there is no reasoning with such. In their case, they actually do throw out the baby, with the bath water...
I mean, just reading Acts 2 alone tells you that the Spirit speaking through Peter has so connected the sense of His words to Joel's prophecy about the Lord's PHYSICAL return IN HIS WRATH against that nation, that Acts 2 goes on to relate that "they were pricked in their heart" about it - in short, they freaked out at the very thought that Israel's PROPHESIED "last days" were just around the corner (but for that later revelation of Romans 11:25-29l, their "last days" had been that at their door!!!)
Last edited:
