ChristiansUnite Forums

 This is to long to paste so i will give out the website.

The Mystery of Iniquity

 The Feast of Trumpets and the Rapture

or

What are Christian Holidays?


http://www.michaelrood.com/satanic.htm


http://www.michaelrood.com/#

Thanks for posting, but I do NOT agree with the message.



(http://www.sirinet.net/~blkidps/blgif1.gif)

I disagree with this also. Easter is approximately the time of passover. I say approximately, due to the difference in the Hebrew calendar and the gregorian calendar. It was decided to celebrate Easter in remembrance of Jesus Christ as this was also the approximate time of His being placed on the cross and rose from the grave. The last supper was held during passover.

There are not any holy days in Christ. There can be the day one is made holy in Christ.

ollie

what ollie said  :)

Now I must agree with that Ollie. Amen!

Hi y'all -

Ollie you said -

My question for you is who authored the Bible? I think we can both agree that God is the author. And Jesus being One with God is the author of the Bible, which contains this verse: Gensis 2:3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it (made it holy), because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made."

Here are some other references to days made Holy by the Lord:

Le 23:3 For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, a holy convocation. You shall not do any work; it is a sabbath to the LORD in all your dwellings.

Le 23:7 On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work.

Le 23:8 But for seven days you shall present an offering by fire to the LORD. On the seventh day is a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work.' "

Le 23:21 On this same day you shall make a proclamation as well; you are to have a holy convocation. You shall do no laborious work. It is to be a perpetual statute in all your dwelling places throughout your generations.

Le 23:24 Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, 'In the seventh month on the first of the month you shall have a rest, a reminder by blowing {of trumpets,} a holy convocation.

Le 23:27 On exactly the tenth day of this seventh month is the day of atonement; it shall be a holy convocation for you, and you shall humble your souls and present an offering by fire to the LORD.

Le 23:35 On the first day is a holy convocation; you shall do no laborious work of any kind.

Le 23:36  For seven days you shall present an offering by fire to the LORD. On the eighth day you shall have a holy convocation and present an offering by fire to the LORD; it is an assembly. You shall do no laborious work.

Nu 28:18 On the first day {shall be} a holy convocation; you shall do no laborious work.

Nu 28:25 On the seventh day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no laborious work.

Nu 28:26 Also on the day of the first fruits, when you present a new grain offering to the LORD in your {Feast of} Weeks, you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no laborious work.

Nu 29:1 - Now in the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall also have a holy convocation; you shall do no laborious work. It will be to you a day for blowing trumpets.

Nu 29:7 Then on the tenth day of this seventh month you shall have a holy convocation, and you shall humble yourselves; you shall not do any work.

Nu 29:12 Then on the fifteenth day of the seventh month you shall have a holy convocation; you shall do no laborious work, and you shall observe a feast to the LORD for seven days.
 
***


So Jesus the Messiah, who authored the Bible declared holy days. When Jesus was on earth He kept these Holy days.

What was Jesus doing when He said, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me (Lu 22:19)."
He was partaking in the Passover. The "this" in the sentence refers to a specific part of the Passover meal.

Paul also says, (Corinthians 5:7-8) Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

The Biblical Festivals have everything to do with God's plan of redemption through Messiah. We have every reason to enjoy them. Christmas and easter are so comercialized. When I celebrated them as a child, it was hard to focus on Messiah and His life, death and resurrection. It was all about Santa Claus, Chocolates, presents, presents and more presents!

My pastor says, "You will never see a Passover edition of Playboy magazine."

Luke 16:16.  "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it."


 Romans 3:20.  "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
 21.  But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
 22.  Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:"

ollie

Hi there Ollie -

In answer to my previous post, you quoted Luke 16:16. I believe that you are misunderstanding this verse. It is wrong to interpret this verse as saying the Law and the Prophets are abolished because of John the immerser. Consider the very following verse: Lu 16:17 "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to become void." So verse 16 certainly doesn't mean that the Law and the Prophets were done with, as we can see by the following verse.

Then you continued by quoting:
Yes, no one is justified by any law keeping, only by the blood of Jesus. I think we agree there.


So what is this righteousness of God without the works of the Law to which the Law and the Prophets testify? If you are trying to say that this verse means that the Law is done away with, then how is this righteousness witnessed by the Law and the Prophets? Where in the Law and the Prophets does it say that the commandments therein were only for a time, until the Messiah came and "finished" them? All throughout the Law and the Prophets it talks about the commandments being an Eternal Covenant (you can do a word search on the word "eternal" in the OT, I will spare you from having to read such a long post  ;) )

And obviously, what Paul is saying here in Romans 3 is not at odds with the Law because he later says: "Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law. (verse 3:31).

I think what Paul is dealing with here and also in Galatians is the issue of circumcising Gentile believers in Messiah, which is the same as becoming a Jew. We know that some were trying to persuade the Gentiles to become Jews by being ritually circumcised, joining "the circumcision group" (see Ro. 15:8, Gal. 2:12, Eph. 2:11) and to obey all the Law (Acts 15, all the Law included Rabbinic Law as well.) Paul is establishing the fact that Gentiles are saved by faith in Messiah, not by becoming ritually circumcised (Jewish). There is nothing in all the Law and Prophets that calls for Gentiles to become Jews in order to be acceptable to God. God says the same Law He gave to Israel also applies to the Gentiles who identify with Israel (Ex 12:49).

Take care -
Chesed

BigD responds:

BigD responds:
Chesed, I will respond to your comments on Romans 3:31 from "A Commentary Of ROMANS Chapters 1-8 Volume, Based on the Greek New Testament" by Ernest R. Campbell, founder and president of Prarie View Bible College.

There are several words written in the Greek language which I will delete. The deleated words will be replaced with () to indicated which Greek words were deleated.

Romans 3:31. "Therefore do we annl the Law through faith? Let it never be, but we establish the law."

The main burden of this verse is to show that faith has not made the Mosaic Law ineffective, but has established the purpose for which it was given. Paul raises the question, "do we annul the law through faith?" Since this verse is open to misinterpretation we need to carefully consider the meaning of the two leading verbs in it. First, the Greek verb translated "annul" () consists of the preposition "()" prefixed to the verb "()" which means to be inactive, inoperative, and idle. This compound verb means to downgrade the Law to a position of uselessness, hence, to abrogate, nullify, and make it void of any value. According to Paul the Law was not an intrinsic part of God's eternal program, but was added for a given period of time, until Christ came and the ushering in of faith (Ga1.3:19-25). The Law was an essential forerunner of faith. It developed a consciousness of the exceeding sinfulness of sin, the prerequisite to incite sinners to be justified by faith (Rom. 3:19-20; 7:13). In view of what is written in First Timothy 1:8-10, the moral principles of the Law are still applicable to lawless sinners, condemning their abominable practices, but not to those who are just in Christ (6:14).

As far as faith annulling the Law was concerned, Paul says, "Let it never be" (), absolutely not. The Mosaic Law, in a preparatory sense, was in full effect until the faithfulness of Jesus Christ was consummated on Calvary. From that time on God has been justifying sinners who are identified with Christ through faith (Gal.3:22, 24-25; Phil. 3:9).

Second, now let us look at the statement, "but we establish the law," particularly, the verb translated "establish" (). This verb basically means we make the Law stand firm or confirm it. If God's underlying reason for giving the Law was to make men righteous, He utterly miscalculated the weakness of their flesh, for it never made any man righteous (Rom. 8:3). True, Moses wrote regarding the righteousness out of the Law, "that the one who has done it will live by it," but it failed because no one ever did it (3:20; 7:21-23). God's ultimate purpose in giving the Law was to make men righteous. This necessitated making them conscious of their sinfulness, that they might believe in Christ, who is the end of the Law unto righteousness (10:4).

BigD -



If this is true, then why does God give the Law as an eternal covenant? If it was only meant to be given for a time, until the Messiah came, why don't the OT scriptures reflect that? Did God change His mind?


Wrong. Do a word search on righteous among the books of the Law and you will find no such verse to back this up.

Here's some of the reasons why I believe God gave the Law to His people:

De 12:28 "Be careful to listen to all these words which I command you, so that it may be well with you and your sons after you forever, for you will be doing what is good and right in the sight of the LORD your God.

Ex. 19:5-7 "Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine; 6 and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.'

The Law was never meant to be a litmus test for salvation, but a means by which God could separate for Himself a People who belong to Him, a nation of Priests to the world.

Paul also knew the Law was never meant as a means of salvation. There has always been only one way of salvation: by grace through faith.

Take care,
Beth

BigD posted:
"According to Paul the Law was not an intrinsic part of God's eternal program, but was added for a given period of time, until Christ came and the ushering in of faith (Gal.3:19-25)."

Chesed responded:
"If this is true, then why does God give the Law as an eternal covenant? If it was only meant to be given for a time, until the Messiah came, why don't the OT scriptures reflect that? Did God change His mind?"

BidD replies:
Beth, keep in mind that Paul is writing to members of the Body of Christ in this dispensation of grace, and not to Israel.

Galatians 3:19-25 "Wherefore then serveth the Law? It was aadded because of transgression, TILL the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but Gid is one.

21 Is the law then against the promise of God? God forbid; for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

24 Wherefore the Law was our schoolmaster until Christ, that we might be justified by faith.  (The words to bring us) are not in the original text, but added by the translators.)

25 But after faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

However, the Law was an "eternal covenant" that God made with the nation of Israel. Today, the Body of Christ is not under the Law, but when Christ returns and establishes His Kingdom upon the earth, the Law will again be in effect. In fact, upon the return of Christ, God will make a "new covenant" with Israel and in that covenant the Law will be written upon their heart (see Jeremiah 31:31-34.) This new covenant (testament) is mentioned in Matthew 26:28 and referenced to in Hebrews 8:6-13.

In the kingdom age the 12 Apolstles will be sitting upon 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. In order for there to be judges, there must be laws to judge by.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

BigD posted:
God's ultimate purpose in giving the Law was to make men righteous. This necessitated making them conscious of their sinfulness, that they might believe in Christ, who is the end of the Law unto righteousness (10:4).

Chesed responded:
Wrong. Do a word search on righteous among the books of the Law and you will find no such verse to back this up.

BigD replies:
Again I will quote from the Commentary by Ernest R. Campbell, from which I posted from earlier. () will indicate the words in Greek that were deleted.

Romans 10:4. "For Christ is the end of the Law unto righteousness to everyone believing."

Having said that the Jews were seeking to establish their own righteousness by keeping the Law, and were not subject to the righteousness of God. Having said the Jews were seeking to establish their own righteousness by keeping the Law, and were not subject to the righteousness of God which is embodied in Christ, Paul Now affirms that "Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness." The Greek word translated "end" () means that Christ is the consummation, fulfilment, and the one who has brought the Law to an end.

Now let us examine the statement that it is "unto righteousness" () that Christ is the end of the Law. The Greek preposition "()" used with the accusative case conveys the thought that the object of Christ's perfectly keeping the intended spirit of the Law was unto the end of righteousness. The Law had a definite place in God's eternal purpose, with reference to which Christ says, "I did not come to destroy it but to fulfill it" (Matt. 5:17). Christ fully met the requirements of the Law by perfectly fulfilling its stipulations in spirit and act. Whereas the Law was never perfectly kept by any sinner and, as a result, laid a curse on men rather than making them righteous, Christ's fulfillment of the Law consummates its purpose in God's plan, revealing the exceeding sinfulness of man's sin and the true righteousness found in Christ (Gal. 3:10, 24-25).

There is a limitation placed on the giving of this righteousness embodied in Christ; it is "to everyone believing." The Greek participle rendered believing is in the present tense and means that Christ is the perfect fulfillment of the Law to every Jew believing, trusting, and having faith in Him. We emphasize, Paul is saying this particularly to the Jewish believers in Rome, those who were once under the Law, and informing them that through their faith identification with Christ they have fulfilled the Law. Since the Law was originally given by God, its standards are in accordance with the righteousness of God, and as that which was fulfilled by Christ, it could be thought of as included in the phrase "the righteousness of God" in the preceding verse.
-----------------------------------------------------
Chesed continues:
Here's some of the reasons why I believe God gave the Law to His people:

De 12:28 "Be careful to listen to all these words which I command you, so that it may be well with you and your sons after you forever, for you will be doing what is good and right in the sight of the LORD your God.

Ex. 19:5-7 "Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine; 6 and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.'

The Law was never meant to be a litmus test for salvation, but a means by which God could separate for Himself a People who belong to Him, a nation of Priests to the world.

Paul also knew the Law was never meant as a means of salvation. There has always been only one way of salvation: by grace through faith.

Take care,
Beth  

BigD responds:
Beth, you are taking Scripture that belongs to the nation of Israel and applying them to members of the Body of Christ. We believers today are not under the dispensation of the Law, but under the dispensation of Grace. When you mix Law and Grace, you end up with confusion and denominations.

Salvation has ALWAYS been by the GRACE of God, by believe and or doing, BY FAITH. what God required at that point in time of human history.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Much and Love The Lord!

BigD -

The crux of the issue here is dispensationalism. I am not a dispensationalist, and this is were our disagreement lies. I would like you to invite you to another thread where I posted an article about dispensationalism if you would like to debate it. Here's the link: http://forums.christiansunite.com/index.php?board=22;action=display;threadid=5552
As far as what you have posted here, let me share some thoughts:

From the previous post you said:
And from your last post:
These two statements seem to conflict. If the Law was given to make men righteous, then it would not have been wrong for Jews to keep the Law to establish their own righteousness.
If the Law could impart righteousness, then why in the world would God need to send His Son to die on the cross?

To back up what I'm saying here, I'll repost the verse you quoted from Galatians:


Guilty as charged!  ;D
Eph. 2 12, 19 -- that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,

Eph. 3:6 the Gentiles have become fellow heirs, members of the same body, and sharers in the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel

Romans 11:16 If the part of the dough offered as first fruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; and if the root is holy, then the branches also are holy.

One household, One body, One lump, One root. We gentiles joined Israel, God's holy nation when we came to faith in Messiah. Israel and the church are one. God has only one bride, no mistresses and He is not a polygamist.


If all the covenants are made with ONLY Israel, then what covenant are you a part of?


So if the Law is abolished by Messiah's death, and Messiah's death was once and for all, I would think the Law would be abolished forever without a need for it to come back in any other "dispensation." Of course, I don't believe the Law was abolished at all (Matt. 5:17).

Take care,
Chesed

I refuse to debate an article written by someone else, other then the one who originally wrote it.  I have not read all of the ariticle and don't intend to read the rest, as I reject it in total. Should you want to discuss viewpoints that I express and disagree with, I will be more then happy to discuss them. Lets just keep it to one or two subjects at a time in order to keep each posting from being to lengthly.

From reading your authors views, my conclusion is that you and he have a misconception about dispensationalism.

Dispensationalism is not a religion or a denomination. It is just a manner in which one studies the Bible. Not all dispensationalists believe, teach or preach the same things.

The author seem to paint all dispensationalists with one brush. In fact, I would venture to say that even you are a dispensationalists.

If you no longer sacrifice animals to cover your sins, you are a dispensationalists. If you do not adhere to the Sabbath Day Laws of the Old Testament, then you are a dispensationalists. If you do not believe that circumcision is required today, then you are a dispensationalist.

As a dispensationalist, I believe that the attributes of God have NEVER changed. He is the same today as He was yesterday, and will be the same tomarrow. However, I do believe that God has dealt differently with mankind throughout human history.

Personally, I do not see the Chruch today as spiritual Israel. God gave to Moses His instructions in righteousness for the nation of Israel, and promised a kingdom here upon the earth if they would keep the Civil, Moral and Ceremonials of Moses, by doing the deeDs/works of the Law BY FAITH. However Israel rejected their promised King and His Kingdom. Therefore, God set the nation of Israel aside (temporarily) and raised up Saul/Paul to usher in the dispensation of Grace.

God gave to the Apostle Paul; His instructions in righteous for the Body of Christ, Jew and Gentile on equal footing and without distinction. Believers today are not promised an earthly kingdom but a heavenly home. See 2Cor 5:1 and Philippians 3:20.

The Chruch today, the Body of Christ, IS NOT spiritual Israel. Isreal has an earthly kingdom to look forward to, and I, as a member of the Body of Christ, have a heavenly home to look forward to.

Where do you plan to spend eternity?

Dispensationalism has to do with dispensing; from which we get or word "dispensary." It is derived from the Greek work that has to do with "house laws" and "stewardship."

In Biblical time a wealthy man might have many servants. He would appoint one servant as the head servant, and that servant was required to carry out the orders (house laws) of his master. He was the "stewart" to carry out his masters "house laws."

Back when animal sacrifices were required for the atonement for sin, they were the "house laws" of that time. Today, those animal sacrifices are not longer required. Therefore, if you do not follow those "house laws" you are a good servant by following those old "house laws". You are following the new orders of the Master,and that makes you a dispensationalist. The same holds true for circumcision and the Sabbath Day travel Laws.

I have pointed this out to others who previously claimed that they were not dispensationalist. When I pointed out the above, now they say that they are now "dispensationalists of a sort."

Are you a dispensationalist, or a dispensationalist of a sort?

In Ephesians 2 alone, Paul shows that he was a dispensationalist, and mentions 3 different dispensations.

In verses 11,12 he speaks of TIMES PAST. In verse 13 he speaks of BUT NOW. In verse 7 the speaks of THE AGES TO COME.

Can you see the changes of "house laws" there, or are they all the same?

Paul tells us in Galatians 1:11,12 "But I certify you brethern that the gospel which was preached of me is not ater man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."

Paul tells the believer in 1Cor11:1 "Be ye followers of me, even as I follow Christ.

Paul preached "the gospel of the grace of God" which was "the mystery" which was keep secret "since the world began." "Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of me, as it is NOW revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit" (Eph 3:5)

Jesus told His disciples to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to the Jews only. Jesus Himself said "I am not sent,but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matthew 15:24) What did he preach? "The gospel of the kingdom" (Matthew 4:23).

It appears to me that Jesus and the 12 preached a different message to their listeners then what Paul preached. If they preached the same thing, then Paul is a liar.

God used Moses to give His instruction in righteousness to the children of Israel through the Civil, Moral and Ceremonial Laws, commonly know as "the Laws of Moses."

God used Paul to give His instructions in righteous (the gospel of the grace of God) to members of "the Body of Christ"

I follow the teachings of Paul (which ARE FROM CHRIST) for my instructions in righteousness. If you think that I or other dispensationalist "throw out/disregard" the rest of the Bible, then you are badly mistaken and know nothing of dispensatism.

All those that I know that study the Bible from a dispensational viewpoint agree with the Apostle Paul when he writes in Romans 14:4 "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." WE THROW OUT/DISREGARD NO PART OF THE BIBLE.

IMHO, you do not distinguish the difference between "Prophesy", which Jesus came to fulfill, and "The Mystery" which was revealed to the Apostle Paul, but "kept secret since the world began.

I will post it in my next response.

God Bless.  
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

In his book "Things That Differ" Pastor Stam list 14 basic things between PROPHECY (P) AND THE MYSTERY (M).

1. (P) Concerns a kingdom; a political organization (Dan. 2:44, Matt. 6:10).

(M) Concerns a body; a living organism (I Cor. 12:12,27, Eph. 4:12-16).

2. (P) The kingdom to be established on earth (Jer. 23:5, Matt. 6:10).

(M) The body given a position in heaven (Eph. 1:3, 2:5-6, Col 3:1-3).

3. (P) Christ to be its King (Jer. 23:5, Isa.9:6,7).

(M) Christ its living Head (Eph. 1:19-23,Col. 1:18).

4. (P) The kingdom prophesied "since the world began" (Luke 1:68-70, Acts3:21).

(M) The body chosen in Christ before the world began, but "kept secret sincethe world began" (Rom. 16:25, Eph.1:4-11, 3:5-9).

5. (P) Israel to be given supremacy over the nations (Isa. 60:10-12, 61:6).

(M) Jew and Gentile placed on the same level before God (Rom. 10:12, 11:32,Eph. 2:16,17).

6. (P) The Gentiles to be blessed through Israel’s instrumentality (Gen.22:17,18, Zech. 8:13).

(M) The Gentiles blessed through Israel’s obstinacy (Acts 13:44-46,Rom. 11:28-32).

7. (P) The Gentiles to be blessed through Israel’s rise (Isa. 60:1-3, Zech. 8:22,23).

(M) The Gentiles blessed throughIsrael’s fall (Acts 28:27,28, Rom.11:11, 12, 15).

8. (P) Prophecy mainly concerns nations as such (Isa. 2:4, Ezek. 37:21, 22).

(M) The mystery concerns individuals (Rom. 10:12, 13, II Cor. 5:14-17).

9. (P) Prophecy concerns blessings, both material and spiritual, on earth (Isa.2:3, 4, 11:1-9, etc.).

(M)The mystery concerns "all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies" (Eph.1:3, Col. 3:1-3).

10. (P) Prophecy concerns Christ’s coming to the earth (Isa. 59:20, Zech. 14:4).

(M)The mystery explains Christ’s present absence from the earth (Eph. 1:20-23, Col. 3:1-3).

11. (P) In prophecy salvation by grace through faith alone is not contemplated.

(M) Salvation by faith alone lies at the very heart of the mystery (Rom. 3:21-26, 4:5, Eph.2:8,9).

12, (P)The proclamation of the prophetic program committed particularly to the twelve (Matt. 10:5-7, Acts 1:6-8, 3:19-26).

(M) The proclamation of the mystery committed particularly to Paul (Eph.3:1-3, 8-9, Col. 1:24-27).

13 (P) The prophetic program revealed through many of God’s servants (Luke 1:70, II Pet. 1:21).

(M) The mystery revealed through one man; Paul (Gal. 1:1, 11, 12, 2:2, 7, 9,Eph. 3:2,3).

14. (P) Old testament writers frequently did not understand the prophecies made known through them (Dan. 12:8-10, IPeter 1:10-12).

(M) Paul both understood and longed that others might understand the mystery revealed through him. (Eph.1:15-23, 3:14-21, Col. 1:9 -10, 2:1-3).

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

BigD -

Before I respond to your post, I want you to know that even though I disagree with you, I still consider you a brother in Messiah (and a fellow member of Israel  :D ).


Hey... that's not fair! I had to read your postings of commentaries! C'mon...  ;)

The author of the article I posted is the Pastor of my congregation, if you would like to respond I could send it to him for you.


By the shed blood of Messiah, I will be with the Lord.



I am not a dispensationalist at all.


Animal sacrifice never had the power to atone for sin (Hebrews 10:4-5). They only served as a reminder for sin (Hebrews 10:3).

Even in the OT, it says that only God is the one, not sacrifices, that takes away sin:

Isaiah 43
22 "Yet you have not called on Me, O Jacob; But you have become weary of Me, O Israel. 23 "You have not brought to Me the sheep of your burnt offerings, Nor have you honored Me with your sacrifices. I have not burdened you with offerings, Nor wearied you with incense. 24 "You have bought Me not sweet cane with money, Nor have you filled Me with the fat of your sacrifices; Rather you have burdened Me with your sins, You have wearied Me with your iniquities. 25 "I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake, And I will not remember your sins.

We know from reading about Ezekiel's Temple in Ezekiel, that even the Messiah and Levitical Priests will perform animal sacrifices in that future Temple.


I believe that Jesus didn't come to abolish the Law (Matt. 5:17) and He didn't abolish the Law by "fulfilling" it. So the other Laws in the Law of Moses are still applicable, but because there is no Temple in Jerusalem and we do not live in the land of Israel, we are not able to keep them all. But we keep those we are able to keep here in the US. Our son is circumcised. We keep the Sabbath on the 7th day and the Biblical Festivals. We eat only Biblically clean food... etc. And we do so with Messiah's example as our guide.


If Paul is at odds with Jesus, then I'm going to go with Jesus' message. But it seems to me that Jesus and Paul were preaching the same message, and Paul is not a liar:

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

Matt 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations (Hebrew: goyim = gentiles), baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,  teaching them to observe all that I commanded you."

The mystery of the Gospel is the fact that the gentiles are included in the nation of Israel, and are also recipients of the Promises given to Israel. This is the context of Eph. 2 & 3.

19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints (Israel of God) and members of the household of God, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit (Eph. 2:19-22).

So gentiles are part of God's household, Israel, and we share the same "house laws," the Torah (Law), that God gave to Israel as an act of grace. Just like the Law I give to my children to follow, I give to them out of grace and my concern for them to be well. I would have the same laws for all of my children.

My pastor have a perfect analogy of this in his own household. He and his wife have 2 natural born children and 2 adopted children. Does he have special laws for his natural born children while he tells his adopted children to do whatever they want? No. He has the same house laws for all of his children.

Here is a thread where I posted from a book, "The Mystery of the Gospel" by Daniel Lancaster. He illustrates that the Mystery of the Gospel is the inclusion of the gentiles into Israel: http://forums.christiansunite.com/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=5004

Well, I think this post is long enough for now. There is still more I'd like to say, but I'll save it until later.

I would still like you to answer this question I had from my previous post:

If all the covenants are made with ONLY Israel, then what covenant are you a part of?

Take care,
Chesed

Chesed,

Your teaching is false. It denies the purpose and meaning of the Cross. Jesus Christ did not die on the Cross for us in vain. The GOOD NEWS is Jesus Christ, not Moses.

This thread has been moved to the debate section where it belonged in the first place.

Moderator

Statement of Faith
« on: April 23, 2004, 05:03:39 AM »      

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christians Unite offers many free services to Christian Webmasters.  Examples include Christian Counters, Christian Guest Books, dynamic Christian content that changes at least daily, web site and address listing, and much more. You might find it interesting to browse through the host of web sites who share the statement of faith or belief below.  Agreement with the statement of faith or belief below is required for all free services offered by Christians Unite. If you are looking for just about anything Christian, you will most likely find what you want in the Christians Unite listings.


Statement of Faith for Free Christians Unite Services


1.  We can only accept entries from web sites that glorify Jesus Christ. If your web site is of a Christian nature then this must be made obvious. If your site is Christian owned, then it must contain a statement of faith, testimony, or presentation of the Gospel. There can be no contradiction of the other terms of this agreement.

2.  You must believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God, is God, was born of a virgin, was crucified as punishment for the sins of mankind severally, was resurrected on the third day, ascended into heaven, and is coming back soon to rule and reign for evermore.

3.  You must believe that the only way to eternal salvation is through personal belief that the blood of Jesus is all-sufficient for the penalty of sin and an acceptance of him into your life as Lord and Saviour.

4.  You must believe in salvation by grace alone, and that salvation is immediate and eternal upon acceptance of Jesus as a one-time sacrifice for your sins, and not obtained through any works, sacraments, traditions or merits of our own.

5.  You must believe in the Trinity: That God The Father, God The Son, and God The Holy Spirit are three Persons present in one God.

6.  Your site cannot contain any rude, obscene, or otherwise unagreeable content, to be judged solely by our opinion.

7.  We reserve the right to cancel any account at any time for any reason. Any dispute will be solved by ChristiansUnite.com.

I did not say that. The verse says what I said. "The law and the prophets were until John". The law and the prophets were not abolished because of John, but were fulfilled by Jesus Christ. The law was the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ and a just a shadow of things to come through HIm. The true, if you will. See Hebrews.
The law did not pass away but was made complete and fulfilled in Christ Jesus.

ollie

as it says in 2nd timothy 3 14-4 5
But you continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, recalling the people from whom you learned it; and recalling too how from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which can give you wisdom that leads to deliverance through trusting in Jesus the Messiah. All Scripture is G-d breathed and is valuable for teaching the truth, convicting of sin, correcting faults and training in right living; thus anyone who belongs to G-d may be fully equiped for every good work. 4 I solemnly charge you befor G-d and Jesus the Messiah, who will judge the livivng and the dead when he appears and establishes his Kingdom (therefor since death is not aloud in heaven his kingdom must be here): proclaim the Word ! Be on hand with it whether the time seems right or not. Convict, censure and exhort with unfailing patients and with teaching. For the time is coming when people will not have patience for sound teaching, but will cater to their passions and gather themselves teachers who say whatever their ears itch to hear. Yes they will stop listening to the truth, but will turn aside and follow myths. So I see know reason for us not to follow the Word of G-d becuse if our Messiah died for our sins we should keep from commiting them and we have an excellent book (Torah) that tells us how and when and what we should do.

sorry to have to say it this way but mikel rood has twice predictad the return of the Messiah and though he may have some good insight and message you do need to watch what he says. Lord Bless

Matthew 22:36  Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Matthew 22:37  Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Matthew 22:38  This is the first and great commandment.
Matthew 22:39  And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Matthew 22:40  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.


Romans 10:1  Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
Romans 10:2  For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
Romans 10:3  For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
Romans 10:4  For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
Romans 10:5  For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.
Romans 10:6  But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)
Romans 10:7  Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)
Romans 10:8  But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
Romans 10:9  That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Romans 10:10  For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Chesed:
I have responded to a portion of Tim Hegg's article. As you will see, I do not have a problem refuting what he has written and that it take a considerable amount of time and space to respond to it.

Being I reject out right what he writes, I will waste no further time in responding to it. If you or he wish to respond to what I have written, I will be more then happy to reply. However, If you wish to respond, I want you or him to refute, from Scripture what I have written.

I do not take as gospel what other dispensationalists have written because I do not agree with them all. Let the Bible be the foundation of all that is written.

Tim Hegg wrote:
Erroneous Hermeneutics
Such beliefs today are, in part, the result of various methods of interpreting the Bible. One such method is called “dispensationalism.” The core of this hermeneutic is the axiom that God required different standards of obedience in different eras or dispensations. What pleased Him in one era may be different in another era. Actually, this same perspective is found quite early in the Church’s history. For example, Justin Martyr (110-165 CE), in his Dialogue with Trypho 2,  uses this argument. He suggests that since people pleased God without observing the Sabbath before God gave the Torah, it is logical to presume that people could do so in a later era, after Messiah’s advent. This remains a pillar of dispensational theology.

BigD responds:
The above, I consider a complete FALSEHOOD. If one considers the above to be "true", then that one must also believe that all denominational churches teach and preach the same doctrine. Dispensationalism is not a denomination, neither is it a doctrine. It is a manner in which one studies the scriptures. All dispensationalists do not teach and preach the same thing.

As a dispensationalist, I do not believe "that God required different standards of obedience in different eras or dispensations." I know of no dispensationalists that do. As a dispensationalist I do believe that salvation/justification has ALWAYS been by FAITH. FAITH in believing and/or doing what God required at that point in time of human history.

Adam and Eve were not justified by offering a sacrifice, building an ark, counting the stars, doing the deeds/works of the Law by faith, or placing their faith and trust in the cross work of Christ for their salvation/justification. After they disobeyed God by eating from The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, God gave them a conscience to know good from evil.

False Hermeneutics is reading and applying future revelation into past events. That is like reading the Laws of Moses into the Garden of Eden, or the battles of WWI into the battles of WWII.

I have never heard or read that the beliefs of Justin Martyr are "a pillar of dispensational theology."

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Tim Hegg goes on:
In the dispensational scheme of things one’s first duty when studying the Scriptures is to discern between what was given to God’s people in the current era. In essence, significant parts of the Scriptures are therefore rendered unessential. It is upon this basis that the neglect of the Sabbath, festivals and food laws, for example, can occur without any twinge of conscience. To dispensationalists, these rules were for another era – they don’t apply to us.

While though the motive of those who developed this hermeneutic was to make the Scriptures relevant, just the opposite occurred. Once a person comes to believe that parts of the Scripture are no longer directly applicable to his life, he has subtly undermined the authority of God’s divine Word. When one is comfortable with viewing one part of Scripture as non-applicable, it is inevitable and logical that they might just as easily set aside other Scriptures that seem archaic or irrelevant.

BigD responds:
2Timothy2:15 "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH.[/b]"

The above, in my humble opinion, strongly indicates that there are divisions in the Bible. Did the atributes of God change over the ages? NO, they are the same today as they were yesterday, and will still be the same tomarrow. However, has God dealt differently with mankind throughout the ages? Yes.

I have never read were Adam and Eve, by faith, were saved/justified by offering a sacrifice to God. I have never read were Able, by faith, had to believe God and build an ark in order to be saved/justified. I have never read where Noah had to, by faith, believe God and count the stars in heaven to be saved/justified. I have never read where Abram/Abraham, by faith, had to do the deeds/works of the Laws of Moses, to be saved/justified. I have never read where the children of Israel, in the Old Testament, Gospels and first part of Acts, had to, by faith, place their faith and trust in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation/justification. Also, I have never read were that members of the Body of Christ, the Chruch for today, has to any of those things, by faith, mentioned prior setting aside of the nation of Israel, after the stoning of Stephen and the raising up of Saul/Paul.
------------------------------------------
Tim Hegg continues:
A bi-product of such dispensational theology is the erroneous pillar which marks separation and distinction between Israel and the Church. Fuller writes:

. . . the basic premise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity.3

BigD responds:
As I have stated previoulsy, dispensationalsim is not a denomination or doctrine. It is by "rightly dividing the word of thuth"  that leads one to know that there is a marked distinction between Israel and the Chruch, the Body of Christ.

Prior to God setting the Gentiles aside at the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11, there were only Gentliles. However, they disobeyed God and God had set them aside. In Genesis 12 we find that God raised up Abram, a Gentile, and from his desendence, God made a "people unto Himself",  which were the children of Israel. At the time God raised up Abram, He also made and undonditional covenant with Abram, that all the world would be blessed through his seed.

God's later added a condition to that covenant in that Abram, and all those males that followed him, had to be circumcised or be "cut off from his people" (see Gen 17:9-14.) That circumcision made a distinction between a Jew and Gentile. That distinction was made by God. From that time forward; to the setting aside of the nation of Israel, for a male Gentile to serve the true and living God, one had to become a Jew in the flesh (proselyte) and submit to circumcision in order to be identified with God's chosen people. After the Law was given to Moses, that Gentile, and all others, had to become a Jew (proselyte) and place themselves under the Civil, Moral and Ceremonial Laws of Moses. Jesus said in Matthew 15:24 "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel," and in John 4:22 "...for salvation is of the Jews." There was a "middle wall of partition" between the Jew and Gentile. The Gentiles were considered "heathen", "unclean", "outside the gate" and called "dogs."

Is the above true today during this "dispensation of grace?" NO!!! During this age of grace, we find that God had set the nation of Israel aside (Romans 11:7-12), temporarily (vs 25) ; just as he did the Gentiles back at the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11. Romans 11:32 "For God hath concluded them all (Jew and Gentile) in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all." So today there is no difference between the Jew and Gentile, they are now both in the same "set aside boat," see also (Romans 10:12). So now there is no distinction between the Jew and Gentile. God showed that to Peter in Acts 10 when He told Peter that the Gentile was no longer to be considered "unclean." The "middle wall of partition is NOW broken down.

So, What did God do with these two "set aside peoples?" He MADE the "one new man" of Ephesians 2:15. This "new creation is known today as the Body of Christ. It consists of Jew and Gentile on equal footing and without distinction. This "new creation cannot be found in prophesy, but was revealed to the Apostle Paul in the "revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began."

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Tim keeps on:
Chafer gives a fuller explanation of this fundamental pillar of dispensational theology:

The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.4

We may therefore state that two of the primary pillars of dispensational theology are:
1) that God requires different standards of righteousness for different dispensations
or eras
- and -
2) that Israel and the Church are always distinct, and that God’s purposes and requirements for each are therefore also distinct.

The dispensationalist’s need to maintain the distinction between Israel and the Church means that the walk (way of life) given to Israel is ‘distinct from that required of the Church.’ It is understandable, therefore, why those who accept dispensationalism would naturally consider the Torah to be something that applies to Israel, but not to the Church. And their logical next step asserts that the New Covenant (understood as the ‘New Testament’) forms the “way of life” for the Church today.

BigD responds:
To begin with, I have never read any of Chafer's writings. And, as I have said before, dispensationalism is not a denomination or doctrine. Chafer may study the Bible from a dispensational view point and gets his theology from that, but not all dispensationalists believe and teach the same thing. If I read any of his writings I may or may not agree with some of the things he writes, but I surely do not look to him as a "pillar."

Tim writes:
"We may therefore state that two of the primary pillars of dispensational theology are:
1) that God requires different standards of righteousness for different dispensations
or eras"

BigD responds:
This is entirely a FALSE assumption, as I have state above.

Tim continues:
"2) that Israel and the Church are always distinct, and that God’s purposes and requirements for each are therefore also distinct."

BigD responds:
Well be finally agree on something.

God raised up Moses and gave to him  His instructions in righteousness for the children of Israel. Those instruction can be found in the Civil, Moral and Ceremonial Laws of Moses. The Gentiles were never under the Law unless the wanted to serve the true and living God. Then they had to become Jews (proselytes) and place themselves under those Laws.

After God set the nation of Israel aside, there was no way for the good news of the gospel to go forward. ALL, Jew and Gentile, are in the same "set aside boat." Therefore, God raised up Saul/Paul and MADE the "one new man" of Eph 2:15 ,the Body of Christ, and revealed to the Apostle Paul that "which was kept secret since the world began."  Also, "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances (LAW) that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to His cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect to an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days; Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ" (Col 2 14-17).

We know from Jer 23:5 and Matt 6:10 that the kingdom promised to Israel will be on this earth.

We know from 2Cor5:1: Col 3:1-2; Philippians 3:20 that members of the Body of Christ have their hope in heaven and not upon the earth.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord! Also, "...rightly divide the word of truth" 2Tim2:15

You dilute the mean of the word into nothingness. Dispensationalism is a modern heresy that has infected the church, especially here in the US. That's all that it is.

We are having a discussion between one person, Chesed, who is a legalist, and several others who are antinomian. Both schools of thought lay outside mainstream Christianity.

The way to understand the law is to ask youself how the particular law was fulfilled in Christ.

Oh Boy ;D



(http://www.sirinet.net/~blkidps/blgif1.gif)

BEP -

Thank you for not deleting my post that you had disagreements with. I'm sorry that I didn't switch my responses to the debate forum earlier.

I do want to make it clear that I don't believe any law keeping will accomplish one's salvation. I've been working hard to show from scripture that the Lord never gave the Law as a means for Israel to accomplish their own salvation. The Law was given for sanctification, not salvation.

I believe that the only way one is saved is by grace through faith, and that the only way we can be acceptable to God is by the shed blood of Messiah.

I'm sure you and I both agree that God wants those who belong to Him to behave a certain way. You would say that a Christian should keep the Law of Messiah. I believe the Law of Messiah and the Law God gave to Moses is the same. The Messiah kept the Law perfectly, and showed us by example how the Law was intended to be kept.

Take care BEP,
Chesed

This is from a previous post of mine about the meaning of the word fulfill:

It all hinges upon how one defines the word fulfill in this context. The greek word used in 17, plerosai, means literally to fill; the word fulfilled in verse 18 is actually a different Greek word. Some possible meanings for fulfill in 17 could be: "to accomplish, to carry into effect, bring to realisation, to perform." Here is how the verse would read with fulfill being understood this way: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to accomplish, to carry into effect, bring to realisation, to perform." It makes perfect sense.

Some interpret the word fulfill in Matt. 5:17 as "to put an end to." Here is what verse 17 would read according to this understanding: " Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to put an end to (the law)." This sounds contradictory.

The same Greek word for fulfill used in Matt. 5:17, is also used in Matt. 3:15 (the baptism of Jesus) "But Jesus answering said to him, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness."

This verse is evidence that the first interpretation I gave of the word fulfill for Matt. 5:17 is the correct one. To believe the contrary, would lead one to come to the same conclusions as 5:17 applied to 3:15 would mean that Jesus did away with baptism by becoming baptised, or that He "put an end to righteousness." Of course we know this is not true. I think we can all agree this is correct way to understand 3:15: "for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill (accomplish, to carry into effect, bring to realisation, to perform) all righteousness."

The same Greek word used in Matt. 5:17, Matt. 3:15 is also used in the Gospels when Jesus fulfills a Prophecy about Him in the Prophets: Matt. "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet..."

BigD -

Thank you for taking the time to respond to Tim Heggs article. I will take the time responding to you this evening.

Take care,
Chesed

 I think you do have this in prophesy                           [quote It consists of Jew and Gentile on equal footing and without distinction. This "new creation cannot be found in prophesy,

actualy you can find it in Isaiah 56:3 Neither let the son of the stranger that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak saying the Lord hath utterly separated me from his people neither let the eunuch say I am a dry tree 4 for thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep My Sabbaths and choose the things that please Me and take hold of My covenant even unto them will I give in My house and within My walls a place and a name better than sons and daughters I will give them an everlasting name that shall not me cut off. Also the sons of the stranger that join themselves to the Lord, to serve Him and tolove the name of the Lord to be his servants every one that keepeth the Sabbath from poluting it and taketh hold of My covenant even them will I bring to My holy mountain and make them joyful in my house of prayer their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon Mine alter for Mine house shall ve called an house of prayer for all people.
also Ezekiel 47:21-23
So shall you divivde this land unto you according to the tribes of Israel. 22 and it shall come to pass that ye shall divide it by lot for an inheritance unto you and to the strangers that sojourn among you and they shall beget children among you and they shall be unto you as born in the contry among the children of Israel they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel.23 and it shall come to pass that in what tribe the stranger sogurneth there shall ye give him his inheritance saith the Lord G-D

here is another prophecy of the Gentiles being brought in.  It apparently is a conversation between the Messiah and the Father in which, the Messiah is called "Israel" even though part if His mission is to save Israel-

Isaiah 49: 1 - 26 - Study This Chapter
 
1 Listen to Me, O islands, And pay attention, you peoples from afar. The LORD called Me from the womb; From the body of My mother He named Me. 2 He has made My mouth like a sharp sword, In the shadow of His hand He has concealed Me; And He has also made Me a select arrow, He has hidden Me in His quiver. 3 He said to Me, " You are My Servant, Israel, In Whom I will show My glory." 4 But I said, "I have toiled in vain, I have spent My strength for nothing and vanity; Yet surely the justice {due} to Me is with the LORD, And My reward with My God." 5 And now says the LORD, who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, To bring Jacob back to Him, so that Israel might be gathered to Him (For I am honored in the sight of the LORD, And My God is My strength), 6 He says, "It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth."
7 Thus says the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel {and} its Holy One, To the despised One, To the One abhorred by the nation, To the Servant of rulers, " Kings will see and arise, Princes will also bow down, Because of the LORD who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel who has chosen You." 8 Thus says the LORD, "In a favorable time I have answered You, And in a day of salvation I have helped You; And I will keep You and give You for a covenant of the people, To restore the land, to make {them} inherit the desolate heritages; 9 Saying to those who are bound, 'Go forth,' To those who are in darkness, 'Show yourselves.' Along the roads they will feed, And their pasture {will be} on all bare heights. 10 "They will not hunger or thirst, Nor will the scorching heat or sun strike them down; For He who has compassion on them will lead them And will guide them to springs of water. 11 "I will make all My mountains a road, And My highways will be raised up. 12 "Behold, these will come from afar; And lo, these {will come} from the north and from the west, And these from the land of Sinim."
 
"Israel" is given as a light to the nations, and a covenant to the people.

Also, I couldn't help but notice that the gentile who joins himself to God is assigned Israel's covenental sign- the Sabbath.

-oneBook

Tim:
How can dispensationalism be a heresy when it is not a denomination or doctrine? IT IS A MANNER IN WHICH ONE STUDIES THE SCRIPTURES.

It is quite possible that there are those who teach the Bible from a dispensational viewpoint do teach heresy. However, there are MANY denominational preachers that also teach what I consider heresy. They do not all agree with eachother.

Dispensationalists, and denominational preachers/teachers do not all preach/teach the same message.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord.

Which makes in a doctrine, right?

BigD responds:
Not in my opinion. My doctrine is what I derived from my study of the Bible. If dispensationalism was a doctrine, then all dispensationalists would believe, teach and preach the same thing.

Further, I am not a denominationalist. Denominationalists normally follow their own Church denominational doctrine. There is no church hiearchy over me to tell me what I should believe.

When I was a Calvinist, I believed the doctrine as taught by the Calvinist church leaders, not from my study of the Bible. They taught me to study the Bible daily, which I did.

My study of the Bible has taken me from the Calvinist doctrine.

From my study of the Bible, I found that it did not jive with what I was being taught and that for their doctrine to fit into the Bible, they had to "spiritualize" the Scriptures to make them fit.

My doctrine came from my study of the Bible. My dispensationalism came about from my study of the Bible, as a means in which the Bible became much more understandable. I believe that Timothy in 2:15 calls it "rightly dividing."

Even Paul was a dispensationalist. You will find in Galatians 2 alone that Paul speaks of 3 dispensations. In verses 11 & 12 he speaks of TIMES PAST. In verse 13 he speaks of BUT NOW, and in verse 7 he speaks of THE AGES TO COME.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord.

Chesed wrote:
I do want to make it clear that I don't believe any law keeping will accomplish one's salvation. I've been working hard to show from scripture that the Lord never gave the Law as a means for Israel to accomplish their own salvation. The Law was given for sanctification, not salvation.

Nana:
Sanctification is done by God only, not by works.  Keeping the law does not sanctify a person.

Jhn 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Jhn 17:19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.

Act 26:18 To open their eyes, [and] to turn [them] from darkness to light, and [from] the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Rom 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.

1Cr 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called [to be] saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:

1Cr 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Heb 10:7 ¶ Then I said, Lo, I come ( in the volume of the Book it is written of Me) to do Your will, O God."
8 Above, when He said, "Sacrifice and offering, and burnt offerings and offering for sin You did not desire, neither did You have pleasure in them" (which are offered according to the Law),
9 then He said, "Lo, I come to do Your will, O God." He takes away the first so that He may establish the second.
10 By this will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Jud 1:1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, [and] called:

Shalom, MalkyEL

PS: Isn't this set of verses fantastic?  ;D - I noticed while gathering them that they prove Jesus is God, once again, as they point to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as Sanctifier - COOL  8)

I noticed Michael Rood was brought up a few times, so I thought I would share some information, as I am extremely familiar with him.

Michael Rood is a false prophet and a false teacher.

Quote:
"Michael Rood and his associates appear to have been busy trying to reinvent some of his website to make it appear more "Christian'', "Church" and "Y'Shua" friendly, since the Sky Angel appearances. However, the truth is, Michael Rood rejects the name of Jesus, calling it and "Christians" pagan and deceived. He uses the name "YAHshua", which is not the Hebrew name of Jesus. It was in fact a word made up by the sacred name movement, which is defined by many researchers as a cult. The correct Hebrew Name that Jesus was derived from is Yehoshua shortened to Yeshua. (Strong's # 3091)  Although he has tried to tone down his anti-christ rhetoric, Mr. Rood is using the same teaching videos and tapes that hold those same beliefs. He claims to have left "the Baptist cult", but never has renounced The Way International cult, which denies the divinity of Christ, and which he was actively a leader in for over twenty years. That is where he obtained his Biblical understandings and 'prophecy' leanings."

"In Light of  Israel, among the many anti-Christ, anti-New Testament, anti-Christian articles,  is an article that explains the Karaite belief about Jesus, which is interesting in light of the fact that Michael Rood is promoted as a "messianic karaite rabbi," and works and walks side by side with Nehemiah Gordon who holds these beliefs:

"Jews Should Not Believe in Jesus because:

"1. He was to have saved them from their enemies (Luke 1:69-71), which he DIDN'T!

2. He was to have saved them from their sins (Matthew 1:21), which he DIDN'T!

3. He was to have returned as the reigning King Messiah in that same generation (Matthew 16:27-28), which he DIDN'T!

4. He was to have come at that time, without tarrying (Hebrews 10:37), which he DIDN'T!

5. The true Messiah was to be "David's Son", and Jesus WASN'T!

6. The Servant described in Isaiah 53 (which Christians claim was Jesus) was to have lived a long life and have many children (verse 10), and to have had his share of wealth, (verse 12), which Jesus DIDN'T! (He died poor and childless at the age of 33.) ....

Jews should definitely NOT believe in Jesus, nor should ANYONE for that matter! The general picture obtained from an impartial reading of the so-called New Testament (not to be confused with the New Covenant described in Jeremiah 31:31-34) is one of a self-deluded, would-be prophet who failed to actualize his claims.

WHY PIN YOUR SALVATION ON A FAIRY-TALE? COME TO YHVH, THE ONLY TRUE SAVIOUR AND KING, TODAY, AND FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS! ..." end excerpts.

Michael Rood stated in a promotion for one of his tours to Israel that, "You are coming to Israel so that I can convert you from a pagan Christian into a Torah loving follower of the Jewish Messiah. " He was in fact stating the wish to convert followers to Jewish and Karaite religious beliefs about Messiah, with the full rejection of the divinity of Jesus Christ. For a full treatment of current Jewish views of Jesus, Messiah and the New Testament, please see Jesus Christ and The Talmud.

Clearly, Michael Rood wishes to convert "pagan Christians" to "true Karaite Judaism" which rejects Jesus Christ and the New Testament."

http://www.seekgod.ca/roodskyangel.htm

http://www.seekgod.ca/topichrministries.htm#michael

Shalom, MalkyEL

Malky EL,

Sister Nana, I'll simply say AMEN and Thanks!! I'm far too tired to do any more research today. I want some quiet time with Jesus and try to go to sleep.

I do enjoy copying much of what you write and putting it on my study list. Thank you Sister.

Love In Christ,
Tom

BigD -

I would like to first thank you for taking the time to read the article and respond to it. I know that takes a lot of time to do, and now I will take the time to respond to you.


If you believe that salvation/justification has always been by grace through faith, then you and I agree.

I'm confused by what you say above and how that disagrees with Tim Hegg's article when it reads "that God required different standards of obedience in different eras or dispensations."


I would like to take a closer look at this this phrase in 2 Tim. 2:15b "RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH."

Understanding this verse correctly is depends on how one understands the Greek word "orthotomeo," which is translated here "rightly dividing." This word occurs only here in the NT, and is a word for a (tent making) tool or measurer. A long time ago a measurer was also called a "divider." Here is the interpretation of the word in the concordance

(http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/3/1098841860-6567.html (http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/3/1098841860-6567.html))--

1) to cut straight, to cut straight ways

a) to proceed on straight paths, hold a straight course, equiv. to doing right

2) to make straight and smooth, to handle aright, to teach the truth directly and correctly

Here is the same verse in another translation: "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not
need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.(NAS)

So I compared the different popular translations to see which ones said, "rightly handling..." versus "rightly dividing..."

Here's what I came up with:

The tranlsations that rendered 2 Tim. 2:15 as "... rightly handling..." (or something to this affect) are as follows:
New/American Standard Version, The Holman Christian Standard Bible, New Living Translation, New/Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, The Douay-Rheims Bible, New Century Version, God's Word Translation, World English Bible, The Bible in Basic English, Weymouth New Testament, New International Version. A total of 12 translations.

The translations that rendered 2 Tim. 2:15 as "... rightly dividing..." are as follows: New/King James Version, Third Millenium, Young's Literal Translation. A total of 3.

So statistically speaking: 4 out of 5 bible translators translate "orthotomeo" as "rightly handling." 9 out of 10 dentists prefer Crest toothpaste... jk.  ;D

I believe that dividing between the Church and Israel wrongly handles the Word of Truth.
 

Yes, Abraham wasn't saved/justified by doing the works of the Law, but God said that Abraham did obey them: Ge 26:5 "...because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws." Yet, Abraham was saved by His faith.  

Paul, when he was illustrating the salvation we have through faith refers to the OT:

"1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. ... Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them,"(Romans 4).

Abraham was justified -- declared righteous -- by faith and his works (i.e. circumcision) were a seal of that righteousness.
I believe that salvation in relationship to works is the same today:

"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them." (Eph. 2:8-11)

Titus 2:11-14
11For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, 12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly
desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, 14 who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.

The pattern is the same regarding the quote Paul uses in Romans 4 from the OT, and the verses I quoted here from the NT: salvation comes first by grace through faith, and good works happen as a result of one's salvation, the Torah contains the good works that were prepared beforehand (Eph. 2:11).


Deut. 18:15 " The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him. 16 "This is according to all that you asked of the LORD your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, 'Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, let me not see this great fire anymore, or I will die.' 17 " The LORD said to me, 'They have spoken well. 18 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 ' It shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require {it} of him."

Peter in Acts references this passage while speaking of Jesus the Messiah to the Jewish People: "22 "Moses said, "THE LORD
GOD WILL RAISE UP FOR YOU A PROPHET LIKE ME FROM YOUR BRETHREN; TO HIM YOU SHALL GIVE HEED to everything He says to you. 23 `And it will be that every soul that does not heed that prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people." (Acts 3:22-23)


I don't think that Tim Hegg is saying that dispensationalism is a denomination or doctrine, but a hermeneutic. Even you said
that it is the way in which you interpret the Scriptures. You and Tim in this case are saying the same thing.

To Big D, (part II)


Setting aside Gentiles? Don't you know that a mixed multitude of Gentiles left Egypt with Israel and received the Law with
them?

Ex 12:49 " The same law shall apply to the native as to the stranger who sojourns among you."

Le 18:26 'But as for you, you are to keep My statutes and My judgments and shall not do any of these abominations, {neither} the native, nor the alien who sojourns among you

Le 24:22 'There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the LORD your
God.' "

Nu 15:29 'You shall have one law for him who does {anything} unintentionally, for him who is native among the sons of Israel and for the alien who sojourns among them.

Nu 15:30 'But the person who does {anything} defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people.


Circumcision wasn't a condition it was a seal or sign of the covenant, as Paul states in the verse I quoted above in
Romans 4. I have heard circumcision and Sabbath as signs of the covenants being compared to a wedding ring one wears to signify the covenant of Marriage.

Circumcision as a distinction between Jew and Gentile? Ex 12:48 "But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the
Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a
native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.


Wrong. See the verses from the Law of Moses above about the same commandment given to Israel is the same for the sojourner.

The practice of a ritual conversion for a gentile to become a Jew is not found in Torah at all, but came about through
Rabbinic Law. The following passage says nothing about a gentile who has to become a Jew to worship God:

Isaiah 56:3 3 Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, "The LORD will surely separate me from His
people... 6 Also the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, To minister to Him, and to love the name of the LORD, To be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath And holds fast My covenant; 7 Even those I will bring to My holy mountain And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar; For My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples." 8 The Lord GOD, who gathers the dispersed of Israel, declares, "Yet {others} I will gather to them, to those {already} gathered."

If Gentiles who wanted to serve God had to become Jews, then why does this passage say that God's house will be called a House of Prayer for all the nations/peoples (Hebrew:goyim = gentiles)? If that was the case wouldn't it more correctly read, "... a House of prayer for (only) the nation of Israel"?

I don't think it is at all coincidental that God mentions gathering the dispersed of Israel in the Isaiah 56 passage just
after He talks about Gentiles choosing to join themselves to Him, and says that He will gather them to those already
gathered. It's a really beautiful picture and I feel so honored and blessed to be a part of this picture through Messiah's shed blood!

I wonder if Messiah had Is. 56:8 in mind when He said, "(Joh 10:16) There are other sheep which belong to me that are not in this sheep pen. I must bring them, too; they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock with one shepherd."


I object to your wording here, BigD. I don't believe God set Israel aside:

(Romans 11)"1 I ask, then, has God rejected His people? Absolutely not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin."

Paul uses himself as an example that God has not rejected Israel. Do you consider Paul part of Israel or the Church?

Obviously Paul considered himself part of Israel.  
 
Paul continues in Romans 11: "17 Now if some of the branches were broken off, and you, though a wild olive branch, were grafted in among them, and have come to share in the rich root of the cultivated olive tree, 18 do not brag that you are better than those branches. But if you do brag--you do not sustain the root, but the root sustains you. 19 Then you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." 20 True enough; they were broken off by unbelief, but you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you either. 22 Therefore, consider God's kindness and severity: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness toward you--if you remain in His kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even they, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in, because God has the power to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from your native wild olive, and against nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these--the natural branches--be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 So that you will not be conceited, brothers, I do not want you to be unaware of this secret: a partial hardening has come to Israel until the full number of the Gentiles has come in."

Some of the branches were broken off and we gentiles (the wild olive branches) are grafted in among them. Israel is
experiencing a "partial hardening." This doesn't sound like they were set aside to me.


So here you reference Eph. 2:14-16:
14 "For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15 by
abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16 and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity."

If you are saying that this verse shows Messiah destroyed and broke down the Law (of Moses), then how do you explain what

Jesus says in Matt. 5:17 that He did not come to abolish the Law? If it is not the Law of Moses that this verse is referring
to, then what is Paul talking about here in Ephesians?

The Greek word for "dividing wall" in this passage is "fragmos." This word was used in the 1st century to identify the oral
Torah (Rabbinic Law) as a wall or fence around the written Torah (Law of Moses) and Pharisees as "builders of the Wall." (The "Dividing Wall" in Ephesians 2:14 by Tim Hegg).

Rabbinic Law was very strict in separating Jews and Gentiles. This was mainly as an attempt to keep the Jewish people from
eating non-kosher foods and from partaking in pagan idol worship. Consider how Peter says that it was against the law for a Jew to associate with a gentile (Acts 10:28) but there is no such prohibition in the Law of Moses.

It makes sense and does not contradict scripture to interpret Ephesians 2:14, that the Law/commandments/ordinances described are those in Rabbinic Law regarding Jews not associating with Gentiles. We see this issue many times in NT scripture.
**********************************************

Well BigD, I'm sure I have given you enough to keep you busy for a little while. I know that I probably overwhelmed you with
much to respond to -- with both my posts and Tim's article -- it was easy to miss this question, but I would still like to know:

If all the covenants are made with ONLY Israel, then what covenant are you a part of?

Thank you,
Chesed

BigD,

in the article in question, the author doesn't ever say that dispensationalism is a doctrine, rather, he labels it as a hermenutic.  A hermenutic is a way of looking at the Bible, glasses one could say.  If you formulate your doctrine from the Bible, and you view the Bible from dispensational glasses, then your doctrine is dispensationally derived doctrine.

That was why the author refered to dispensational doctrine, doctrine that was arrived at using the dispensational hermanutic.

Also, you said that you didn't agree with the "first pillar" of dispensationalism that was outlined in his article-

"1) that God requires different standards of righteousness for different dispensations
or eras"

You don't believe that?  Then you keep the law?
The law is a revelation of God's righteousness, and if you don't observe it now, then you must believe that God requires different standards of righteousness for different dispensations or eras.  Here is the litmus test-
Was violating the Sabbath a sin for Moses?
How about for Isaiah?
Nehemiah?
Jesus??
His disciples (post resurection)???
Yourself????

If you answer some yes, and some no, then you must believe in differing standards.

From the blurb you posted on your Calvinist adventures ;)  , the hermenutic of spiritualization is what they used to arrive at their doctinal stands.  Of course, some dispensationalists use spiritualization as a hermenutic as well as dispensationalism.

The Timothy in 2:15 verse is used as a support verse for the dispensational hermanutic, but in context, Paul is exorting Timothy to handle the word correctly-
15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. 16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness, 17 and their talk will spread like gangrene.

Most people who are serious and sincere in their relationship with God as I believe both you and I are, try to handle the Word correctly (rightly divide, or rightly measure).  So I don't think that verse promotes a dispensational hermenutic.  It definately doesn't spell out that eternal commands that God told Israel not to stray from, even if someone working miracles comes and tells them too (Deut. 13), are now no longer essential and you don't have to do them.

I was raised in dispensationalism, (a general belief that there are different eras where God's requirements change in regards to the Law of Moses, and that God has 2 brides- Israel and the Church).  I studied the Bible and didn't see how that was possible without much of God's Word being rendered false (as in the example from Deut. above). If Jesus preached the message to the disciples that included the law, and then told them to teach it to all the Gentiles, then how can Paul come along and say that Gentiles don't need the law.
Of course, I would not say that Paul's and Jesus' message conflicted, but that they preached the same gospel.
The thing that causes the most confusion in regards to the law is that when we read "law" (as Christians) we generally view it as a monolithic representation of the Torah.  In other words, every time we see that word, we assume Paul is talking about the Torah.  This is not the case.  In fact Paul's most used term- "under the law" is not referring to the Torah, but to a state of erroneous belief that by being circumsized, you become part of Israel.  Indeed, you do become subject to rabbinic law, but both Paul and Jesus rebuke rabbinic law where it oversteps God's law (the Torah), and where the rabbinic law was a burden that hurt people instead of helped to keep God's law as in-

Mat. 23:4
4 "They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger."

Paul makes all his points using God's law to prove that God's law teaches that it can't impart rightousness.  God's law points to the death and resurection of the Messiah as a means to pay for Israel's and the Gentiles sins.  

To prove that the term "under the law" is not equivalent with "Torah" (God's law) lets look at the following verse:

1 Cor. 9:19
19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20 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; 21 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. 22 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. 23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.

This is interesting that Paul states that he "became as a Jew" seing that Paul is a Jew by birth!  Second, he states clearly that he is not under the law even though he became as one who is under the law.  This no doubt is a reference to the fact that Paul submitted to the whip of the synagogue when they punished him for his proclaiming Yeshua.  From historical records, we can see that lashes were given in many cases instead of a death penalty.  The thinking was that if the person submitted to lashes, then they were not rebellious in intent. Next he came to those "without law" though Paul was not without the law of God (Torah), but was under the law of Messiah (Christ).  In that statement he equates the 2 laws, e.g. the law of God = the law of Messiah.

Here again we find talk of the "burden" of Messiah-

28 "Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29 "Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. 30 "For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."

The word for burden referred to the obligation of a person to the leaders interperetation of God's law.  Jesus said the teachers of that day were placing a heavy burden on the people, and we can easily see that by reading a little of the Talmud.  The laws were multiplied and taken beyond the reasonable understanding of God's law.  Jesus was saying that His obligation was light in the way he interpereted God's law.

Well, I'll call it a night now.

Peace and blessings upon you and yours.

-oneBook

oneBook posted:
in the article in question, the author doesn't ever say that dispensationalism is a doctrine, rather, he labels it as a hermenutic.  A hermenutic is a way of looking at the Bible, glasses one could say.  If you formulate your doctrine from the Bible, and you view the Bible from dispensational glasses, then your doctrine is dispensationally derived doctrine.

That was why the author refered to dispensational doctrine, doctrine that was arrived at using the dispensational hermanutic.

BigD responds:
I stand corrected. THANKS for pointing that out to me.

When I consider the word "doctrine", I consider that my doctrine comes from my study of the Bible. I do not consider my doctrine in the same light that I view Calvinist, Pentecostal, Methodists and other denominational doctrines. They are doctrines of men that they follow. It is man that has labeled dispensationalism as a doctrine and I follow no man's teachings. However, there are individuals Bible teachers who's Biblical views I might agree with, and even learn from.

By efinition, dispensations have to do with "stewardship" and "house Laws." I find that God has been dispensing "house Laws" since the creation of Adam, and Adam was a steward of God. Therefore, I follow the doctrine of God.
-------------------------------------
oneBook continues:
Also, you said that you didn't agree with the "first pillar" of dispensationalism that was outlined in his article-

"1) that God requires different standards of righteousness for different dispensations
or eras"

You don't believe that?  Then you keep the law?
The law is a revelation of God's righteousness, and if you don't observe it now, then you must believe that God requires different standards of righteousness for different dispensations or eras.  Here is the litmus test-
Was violating the Sabbath a sin for Moses?
How about for Isaiah?
Nehemiah?
Jesus??
His disciples (post resurection)???
Yourself????

If you answer some yes, and some no, then you must believe in differing standards.

BigD responds:
It was the author that stated that dispensationalists believe "that God required different standards of righteousness for different dispensations or eras"

Since the fall of Adam, salvation/justification was ONLY on the basis of FAITH. However, God did require different means to deomonstrate one's faith. Able demonstrated his faith by bring the proper offering, Noah demonstrated his faith by building the arch. Abram demonstrated his faith by just believing God. Abraham demonstrated his faith by offerin up his son. Therefore, I conclude that FAITH was the only standard in which one was saved/justified.

I have stated many time that salvation/justification has always been based on FAITH. Faith in believing in what God said/and or required at that point in time of human history.
------------------------------------
oneBook goes on:
From the blurb you posted on your Calvinist adventures, the hermenutic of spiritualization is what they used to arrive at their doctinal stands.  Of course, some dispensationalists use spiritualization as a hermenutic as well as dispensationalism.

BigD responds:
I agree toatally. That is what I reject. I know many Baptist and Pentecostals that claim to be dispensationalists and then have to spiritualize the Scriptures in order to make them fit their denominational doctrine.
--------------------------------
one Book goes on:
The Timothy in 2:15 verse is used as a support verse for the dispensational hermanutic, but in context, Paul is exorting Timothy to handle the word correctly-
15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. 16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness, 17 and their talk will spread like gangrene.

BigD responds:
My preference for the meaning "rightly dividing" comes from the Greek word "orthotomego" (Strong's 3718) "to make a straight cut." Being Paul was a tentmaker, I believe that is why he used that phrase. As a tentmaker, the materials had to be "cut straight" in order for them to fit properly. IMHO, those who have to "spiritualize" scriptures, are not cutting on a staright line. They are cutting to fit the doctrine that they want to believe. Some cut the Scriptures to fit "infant baptism", others cut the Scriptures to fit "total emersion." Others cut the Scriptures to fit "in the name of Jesus." Still others cut the Scriptures to fit "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost." In the protestant churches there isn't a majority  view ('cut") as to when, why or how one is to be baptized. The "doctrine of God" that I adhere to says in Ephesians 4:5 that there is only one baptism in force today, and that, I do believe is found in 1Cor12:13.
-----------------------------
oneBook continues:
Most people who are serious and sincere in their relationship with God as I believe both you and I are, try to handle the Word correctly (rightly divide, or rightly measure).  So I don't think that verse promotes a dispensational hermenutic.  It definately doesn't spell out that eternal commands that God told Israel not to stray from, even if someone working miracles comes and tells them too (Deut. 13), are now no longer essential and you don't have to do them.

BigD responds:
There is no doubt in my mind that you and I are both sincere in our relationship with God. It is our relationship with God that is what matters in our salvation/justification. If we both have the proper relationship with God, then our salvation is secure, but if we disagree in some areas of doctrine, it does not effect our salvation, but it could effect our relationship with Him and possible loss of rewards at the Judgment Seat of Christ.

From my study of the Bible, I see a distinct difference between the Jewish Church and the Church for today, the Body of Christ. God gave to Moses His instructions in righteousness for the Children of Israel in The Civil, Moral and Ceremonial Laws, known as the Laws of Moses. God gave to Paul the instructions in righteousness for members of the Body of Christ, through the preaching of the Cross according to the revelation of the mytery the, the gospel of the grace of God. Moses, John the Baptist, Jesus and the 12 taught/preached the Law. Paul taught/preached Grace. Grace and Law are two entirely different doctrines. When they are mixed they only bring about confusion and denominations.

oneBook continues:
I was raised in dispensationalism, (a general belief that there are different eras where God's requirements change in regards to the Law of Moses, and that God has 2 brides- Israel and the Church).  I studied the Bible and didn't see how that was possible without much of God's Word being rendered false (as in the example from Deut. above). If Jesus preached the message to the disciples that included the law, and then told them to teach it to all the Gentiles, then how can Paul come along and say that Gentiles don't need the law.

BigD responds:
It is apparent to me that your dispensational teachings came from the doctrine of some man. In my study of the Bible, I have never seen that God had 2 brides, but one, and that is Israel.

When one "rightly divides" the Scriptures, one will see that Paul did not preach the same message that Jesus preached while He was upon the earth. However, Paul did preach the message that Jesus gave to him from His heavenly position. When Jesus was upon the earth, He preached "the gospel of the kingdom" (Matt 4:23; 9:35). Paul NEVER preached "the gospel of the kingdom. Paul preached "the gospel of the grace of God," that was revealed to him by Christ, from His heavenly position, (see Galatians 1:11,12). "Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, but is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit" (Ephesians 3:5). Also read 1-10.

When Jesus was upon the earth, the Law was in effect. Even thought Jesus and the 12 preached "the gospel of the kingdom," the Law was in effect at that time. Also, when the kingdom is established upon the earth the Law will also be in effect. Jesus promised His 12 disciples that they would be sitting on 12 thornes judging the 12 tribes of Isreal. For one to be able to judge, there must be a law to judge by. Further, the Law was only given to the nation of Isreal. For a Gentile to serve the true and living God, that Gentile had to place themselves under the Law.

When Jesus gave the 12 the "so called" great commission, It was to go to all the world with the gospel of the kingdom. That gospel included the observance of the Law. Also, when that gospel is again preached after the rapture of the Church, the Body of Christ, the Law will again be in effect. The Gentile during that time will again also have to place themselves under the Law in the kingdom that Jesus will establish upon the earth.

It was when Isreal, as a nation, rejected the Trinity; that God set gave Israel "slumbering eyes" (Rm 11:8). God is not dealing with Israel as a nation while they are temporarily sleeping (set aside). "...blindness in part (temporarily) is happened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" (vs 25), which is the rapture of the Chruch, the Body of Christ.

Jesus was the only person that kept all aspects of the Laws of Moses. Therefore, He fulfilled ALL of it.

In Romans 11:32 we find that God had "...concluded them all (Jews and Gentiles) in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon all." Just as God set the Gentiles aside at the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11, He now has set the nation of Israel aside also. He informs Peter of this In Acts 10. With Israel temporarily blinded/set aside, so is the Law. The Gentile no longer has to become a Jew (proselyte), and place themselves under the Law to serve the true and living God.

After God set Israel aside, He MADE the "one new man" of Epehsians 2:15, known today as "the Body of Christ." There is no longer a distinction between the Jew and Gentile. They are both in the same "set aside boat." A graceous God raised up the self proclaimed "chief of sinners" to bring a new message of God's grace to a lost and dying world. That message was not the "good news" of the Law, but the "good news" of Grace. Not salvation by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH, but by one placing their FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ.

All those that are saved under the dispensation of the Law will inherit the kingdom here upon the earth. All believers saved during this dispensation of grace, in which we now live, will inherit a heavenly home. This dispensation of grace is a (parenthetical) period during the dispensation of the Law. It cannot be found in prophesy and "was kept secret since the world began" until revealed to the Apostle Paul.
--------------------------------------
oneBook goes on:
Of course, I would not say that Paul's and Jesus' message conflicted, but that they preached the same gospel.
The thing that causes the most confusion in regards to the law is that when we read "law" (as Christians) we generally view it as a monolithic representation of the Torah.  In other words, every time we see that word, we assume Paul is talking about the Torah.  This is not the case.  In fact Paul's most used term- "under the law" is not referring to the Torah, but to a state of erroneous belief that by being circumsized, you become part of Israel.  Indeed, you do become subject to rabbinic law, but both Paul and Jesus rebuke rabbinic law where it oversteps God's law (the Torah), and where the rabbinic law was a burden that hurt people instead of helped to keep God's law as in-

Mat. 23:4
4 "They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger."

Paul makes all his points using God's law to prove that God's law teaches that it can't impart rightousness.  God's law points to the death and resurection of the Messiah as a means to pay for Israel's and the Gentiles sins.  

To prove that the term "under the law" is not equivalent with "Torah" (God's law) lets look at the following verse:

1 Cor. 9:19
19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20 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; 21 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. 22 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. 23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.

This is interesting that Paul states that he "became as a Jew" seing that Paul is a Jew by birth!  Second, he states clearly that he is not under the law even though he became as one who is under the law.  This no doubt is a reference to the fact that Paul submitted to the whip of the synagogue when they punished him for his proclaiming Yeshua.  From historical records, we can see that lashes were given in many cases instead of a death penalty.  The thinking was that if the person submitted to lashes, then they were not rebellious in intent. Next he came to those "without law" though Paul was not without the law of God (Torah), but was under the law of Messiah (Christ).  In that statement he equates the 2 laws, e.g. the law of God = the law of Messiah.

Here again we find talk of the "burden" of Messiah-

28 "Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29 "Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. 30 "For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."

The word for burden referred to the obligation of a person to the leaders interperetation of God's law.  Jesus said the teachers of that day were placing a heavy burden on the people, and we can easily see that by reading a little of the Talmud.  The laws were multiplied and taken beyond the reasonable understanding of God's law.  Jesus was saying that His obligation was light in the way he interpereted God's law.

BigD responds:
Paul and Jesus did preach different messages. Jesus preached "the gospel of the kingdom" to the Jews only. Paul never preached "the gospel of the kingdom", but "the gospel of the grace of God" to all mankind. The 12 disciples were sent to proclaim the gospel of the kingdom to all the world, but I can't find a record that they ever did. Yes, Peter went to Cornelius, but God had to send him. We find in Glatians 2:9 that James, Peter and John agreed with Paul that they woul stay with the Jews while he went to the Gentiles. Even the epistles written by those men are written to the Jews.

As one that is classified as a dispensationalist, there is one rule I attempt to never violate. That is NEVER read future revelation into past events. One should never read Paul's Epistles into the Gospels. That is like reading the Laws of Moses into the Garden of Eden.  You quote Mattew 23:4 above but there is no doubt in my mind that you do not observe Matthew 23:3. You are mixing apples and oranges and not worthy of comment, other then to say you should not do that.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Much and Love The Lord!

Brothers and Sisters,

Man has made a horrible mess with tags, labels, denominations, and all kinds of other man-made divisions.

BUT, there is HOPE, and that HOPE hasn't changed. The Gospel of the Grace of God is simple enough for a child to understand. God made it simple enough for a child to understand because children are precious to him. For adults coming to Christ, HE wants us to come to him as little children with faith in Jesus and all of HIS Promises.

The preaching of the Cross and Jesus is the GOOD NEWS! The simplicity and beauty of the GOOD NEWS is that anyone can understand it and simply come to Jesus like a little child, ask Jesus to forgive our sins, and ask Jesus to come into our hearts. Little children understand gifts and presents. Little children quickly accept gifts, and they don't ask a thousand questions before opening and enjoying the gift. Little children can also understand the simple truth that we have a Heavenly Father who loves us, and he wants us to love Him.

I give thanks for the simplicity of the Gospel of the Grace of God. I also give thanks for the simplicity of accepting God's GIFT and loving HIM. Most of all, I give thanks for HIM loving me, dying on the cross for me, and saving me.


Love In Christ,
Tom

I like your style BEP - I was gonna post something similar  ;D

As I sit back skimming over all the verbage in this thread, I am reminded that the Gospel is clear, simple, concise - not obscure and loaded with rules and works.

Jesus said, Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbor as yourself.  He said - this My NEW commandment - Love one another as I have loved you.

He also said in Matt 25 that there will be two groups of people - sheep and goats - the sheep walk in love and compassion [when you have done it to the least of these, you have done it unto Me] and are part of the Kingdom of Heaven - the goats don't, and are accursed.  Simple, clear, concise.  

I just wanna be a sheep  8)

Shalom, Nana

I found this while surfing the web:

Part 1

In my study over many years, I have heard clever sayings like "eat the fish and spit out the bones". I have witnessed many who had convinced themselves that they could do this, but before they could back away from their culinary “experience” the bones got caught in their throats. By this I mean that I have witnessed people who flirted with "teachings" that led them into doubt about who the Messiah really was, about the validity and inspiration of the New Testament Scriptures, and the next thing you know, they were practicing their own self styled faith which loosely resembled rabbinic Judaism. I have learned that there are many false prophets and false teachers in the "messianic/roots/sacred name" movement, as well as in the vaguely defined “Christian” movement, who are more concerned about building a financial kingdom, than they are about peoples spiritual well being and eternal destination. Many of the people in the roots movement are self professed “former” Christians, who now view themselves as being “de-Christianized”, but the truth of the matter is, that they have taken many of the errors and false teachings learned from their particular denomination, and brought them along into the Messianic movement. There is also another important observation that I have made in my travels. Goats will eat anything but sheep are usually very selective. We should probably all use this example, and check our spiritual "plates" very closely and often, because sometimes the bones are well hidden. Another observation is that it’s often harmful for the spiritual nutrition of “sheep” if they feed on goat’s food, and like arsenic, it appears to be cumulative. It has always perplexed me why some people would spend so much time and effort searching for what they somehow perceive to be an edible scrap of “food”, when in order to retrieve it, they must first dive to the bottom of a dumpster and sort through all of the “garbage” before they can “savor” it.

It also seems so inconceivable to me lately, how many I have seen or heard about, who have denied the Messiah, and who have fallen away from the Faith. “How did this happen?” was a question that I first asked myself. The answer is a simple one. It is not about how much esoteric extra biblical "gnostic" teaching we can absorb. It is about relationship. Every one is reading books "about" the scriptures, which are merely the opinions of men, but few are actually "dividing" the word like the noble Bereans did, and were commended for in the book of Acts. The scripture clearly warns us about this folly of being led by those with a "form" of godliness in 2 Timothy 3, where we are told that if we do this we will be:

7 "always learning, but never being able to come to a full knowledge of the truth."

There are many books, articles, and “teachings” that are currently circulating in this movement, and also many websites, that I often wonder about. In their search for new and “exciting” esoteric information to tickle their ears, many are accepting anything looking remotely Hebraic as automatic gospel truth. It is amazing that there are so many authors who have grown up in suburbia in "ethnic homes", and then in their thirties or forties they realize that they may have something that they can "market" because of their claimed Jewishness [which some falsely manufacture], change their names, write a book, [or a series of books] and everyone eats it up like candy, hanging on every last word. People are always talking about the "mysteries", when they have not even mastered what is written in the surface text of the Scriptures. It is a mystery to me that A Most High Righteous Elohim keeps on putting up with us. The fact that He does is a true definition and demonstration of His long suffering, and unselfish love. I often wonder how much longer He will “wink” at this behavior.

Lately, it has been like a deja vu, reminding me of the days when I would occasionally tune in to one of the religious broadcasting networks and see all the preachers acting like they had the "holiest " of intentions, shouting the name of Jesus while secretly formulating their next money making scheme. Eventually, as we all know, their madness became known, and many of their "kingdoms" were divided.
Many in this movement appear to me as being a similar situation. They have the characteristics of those same types of vipers, but with different names and “teachings”. It reminds me of the hippies who started out with peace, love, and good intentions, and then all ended up on Wall Street selling out just like the people they had so angrily criticized.

Well, enough of my complaining. This is a new year, things are moving fast, and self professed "prophets" who refer to themselves as “Christians”, and other proven false prophets from the Hebraic movement, have also said that there will be a whole lot happening [1].
I am starting to think that I might need a new image. Maybe I will start a website and a forum, open up a live online chat room, and possibly even change my screen name. I can then post on my forum under multiple screen names, while pretending to be different people, and use one of my aliases to cheer on the other and tell myself how “deep” and “ruach [spirit] based” my teachings are.

Maybe I will write a letter to my website posing as an “enlightened” follower using one of my many aliases, pointing out the fact that I am an amazing leader/teacher/prophet. I will write another stating that I am the one who is “truly” anointed, and who has clearly been appointed to take the “true” faith once delivered to the apostles to all of the world, and to “unlock” the books that have been sealed, therefore clearing up all misunderstanding created by the faulty translations from the “altered” and “corrupted” Greek texts. These “errors” were of course further compounded by the incorrect “interpretation” of books like Galatians by the church, so I will “correct” and “restore” them to their original meaning.

Part 2

From now on, maybe I will promote myself as " Dr." H. Truth, or maybe throw a "ben" or a "bar" in there somewhere to give me a little more Hebraic flavor like some of the other “instant sages” in this movement have done. I am sure you are all wondering why. I never put the six or so years in needed to become a Doctorate of Theology, but as I have seen in the past and lately, that really doesn't matter. People will not ask for proof as long as you are telling them what they want to hear, [2] and will even plunk down their hard earned cash to buy it.


I will formulate my own "gospel of hate" based on my gospel of greed, and teach that my group practices the “original faith”. I will not personally lead anyone to salvation, but will merely lure them away from the faith that they once practiced by openly mocking and condemning it, and then by using my “scholarship” and newly “revealed” understandings which will assist them in charting their journey into the spiritually “murky” waters of uncertainty and confusion. This “course”, which is littered with the “fallen” who have gone before them, will eventually lead them to the shallow rocky waters of gnosticism where the faith they once held will become tragically “shipwrecked” [3]


I will assemble my own band of loyal followers [cheering section] by creating strife and division, throw around some "mystical" or kabbalistic terms, and then refer to all others who are not as "knowing" with derogatory names such as "kirche" or "xtians” while justifying my actions as "tough love". I will, of course, choose a "special" name for The Almighty and the Messiah that only my group of followers will use. If anyone tries to question why it is not translatable from the original Hebrew, I will just point to my "credentials", or perhaps claim that “ha satan” is attempting to persecute me because I am the “chosen” messenger.


If I feel like getting really bold, I may even imply that the billions of people who read those "corrupted" bible translations and called on the Name of Jesus may not have achieved "true" salvation, and may even tell them that baptism in “that” name is not really legitimate, and that it could possibly be the name of the “abomination” or the anti-christ. I will allude to the “fact” that my group of "true" believers may be the remnant that was spoken of, and the sole heirs to the Kingdom.[4]


I will write articles and books, possibly even a series, based on my" learned" or "revealed" wisdom, even if it does not line up with scripture. Better yet, I can create my own "translation" that will “unlock” the books that have been sealed up until now, by utilizing someone else’s base text, possibly even one of the texts that I had previously described to my followers as being "corrupt", and then punch in a few Hebraic sounding words and phrases, add a few “scholarly” footnotes, and with that, maybe I can make the scriptures "line up" with MY theology [5].
If I have a hard time defining some of the Hebrew words because of my limited language skills, or if they can not be found in the lexicon that I am using to “translate” with, I can just use Yiddish words instead, because none of the non-Jews who buy my "restored" translation will realize it anyway.


Some of the articles that I write might even be controversial, but that is okay, because then I will be able to debate people, and then sell books and video tapes related to the debate. There is also the possibility that I can attend some Christian “merchandising/broadcast” conventions, even if my teachings go against their supposed statement of faith, and line up some broadcast time to promote my "ministry" on networks owned by those who I have in the past criticized, called derogatory names, and whose beliefs I reject. I can arrange some speaking tours, and then spam all of the forums, and personal e-mail addresses gleaned from those forums with my unsolicited notification of the event, as well as ads for the latest merchandise that I am peddling.

Part 3

Even better yet, I can set up some conferences utilizing the facilities which are also owned by some of those same people who I have so harshly condemned, while deceptively convincing them that I am just an average Messianic lover of “Jesus”, instead of a person who actually despises everything that they believe and stand for. What is most amazing, is that they will not have a clue, even after I request that they cover up or remove all the crosses and other symbols of their faith from the premises while we are there.


For my finale, maybe I can imply that I am the one written about who is "like Moses", and that all the people who have been enlightened by my "deep teaching" should follow me as their leader into a "greater exodus". I will "teach" them, through utilizing my "sod" kabbalistic interpretation of the scriptures, and of course through “direct revelation”, that they should sell all of their belongings, and then generously support my "ministry"[6]. It will be most important that they do this while waiting patiently for me to get my "direct revelation", even though I am a proven false prophet [7], signaling that it is the correct time for me to lead all of the "true believers" out of the United States [or “babylon” if you prefer] into the "promised land" which will be somewhere in the middle east. I will through my “teachings” reinforce the importance of us being there as predicted in Biblical prophecy, so that we the “remnant”, “the elect”, and the ones who are “great in the kingdom of heaven”, can usher in the Messiah and fulfill the end time prophecy.


Of course, eventually my madness will become evident as it has with many others before me [8-9]....Think ???


BACK TO REALITY


If the Messiah showed up on the scene today, do you think He might tip over some tables?

Sincerely,
"Dr." H. "bar" Truth

Footnotes:
[1] If a "prophet" makes enough predictions, the odds are that eventually one of these ambiguous statements will occur. At this point they can then step up and receive the prophets "crown". I have also learned, that no matter how loudly someone cries "lashon hara" or "slander", false teaching is STILL false teaching, and false prophecy is the same as well.[In the TaNaKh [OT], false prophets were stoned]

[2] 2 Timothy 4

3 For a time will be when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own lusts, they will heap up to themselves teachers tickling the ear;
4 and they will turn away the ear from the truth and will be turned aside to myths.

[3] 1Timothy 1
18 This charge I commit to you, my son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before about you, in order that you might war a good warfare by them, 19 holding faith and a good conscience, which some have put away and made shipwreck as to faith.
2 Corinthians 11
3 But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve in his craftiness, so your thoughts should be corrupted from the simplicity due to Christ. 4 For if, indeed, the one coming proclaims another Jesus, whom we have not proclaimed, or if you receive another spirit, which you did not receive, or another gospel, which you never accepted, you might well endure these.

[4] Galatians 5
19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality,
20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions,
21 envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

[5] I also have the option of doing my own "translation" so that I can make scripture "line up" with MY theology. Let me see....Revelation 22:18-19... Hmmmm....on second thought...maybe not.

[6] "Limited" free kool-aid will be given in exchange for all of my follower’s worldly possessions.

[7] If one removes failed prophecies that they have made from their website, does it relieve them of being defined as a false prophet?

[8] 2 Timothy 3
8 But in the way Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so also these withstand the truth, men having been corrupted in mind, found worthless concerning the faith.
9 But they will not go further, for their foolishness will be plain to all, as also that of those became.

[9] Numbers 16:23-35
23 And the LORD spoke to Moses saying,
24 Speak to the congregation saying, Get away from the tent of Korah and Dathan and Abiram.
25 And Moses rose up and went to Dathan and Abiram. And the elders of Israel followed him.
26 And he spoke to the congregation, saying, I pray you, get away from the tents of these wicked men. And touch nothing of theirs lest you be destroyed in all their sins.
27 So they got away from the tent of Korah, Dathan and Abiram, on every side. And Dathan and Abiram came out and stood in the door of their tents, and their wives, and their sons, and their little sons.
28 And Moses said, By this you shall know that the LORD has sent me to do all these works, and that not from my own heart.
29 If these men die the common death of all men, or if they are visited according to the examination of all men, the LORD has not sent me.
30 But if the LORD makes a new thing, and the earth opens her mouth and swallows them up with all that they have, and they go down alive into the pit, then you shall understand that these men have provoked the LORD.
31 And it happened, as he had made an end of speaking all these words, the ground under them split apart.
32 And the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up, and their households, and all the men who were for Korah, and all their goods.
33 They and all that they had went down alive into Sheol, and the earth closed upon them. And they perished from among the congregation.
34 And all Israel around them fled at their cry. For they said, Lest the earth swallow us up.
35 And there came out a fire from the LORD and burned up the two hundred and fifty men who offered incense.

I do not ever recall reading in the scriptures, when John the Baptist was preparing the way of the Messiah, that he was setting up tables, and selling tapes, books, shofars, DVD’s, and "conversions"...

[end]

MalkyEl –

That is an interesting article you found on the web. Do you mind citing the source?

He does say many things that are sadly true about the Messianic movement. I’ve heard it referred to as “the granola factor" – flakes, fruits and nuts. We’ve seen it all. ;D

But yes, it is hard to laugh when there are a lot of false teachings within the Messianic movement. Such as: Gentiles believing they are part of the lost tribes of Israel. Or believing that gentiles are second class citizens and encouraged to either go to a gentile Christian church, convert to Judaism or to only support the Messianic movement financially (as stated by organizations such as UMJC, such groups are more concerned with being accepted by Jewish communities than by God; making our identity in lineage rather than our identity being in Messiah).  There are also self proclaimed “Rabbis” who have never attended any seminary whether Christian or Jewish.

All these reasons above is why I have a hard time labeling myself as messianic because I don’t want to be painted with the same brush. The congregation we go to can only be best described as a Torah community. Our Pastor is a two time graduate of a Baptist seminary, and belongs to ETS (Evangelical Theological Society). Scriptural accuracy is important to us.

As an aside, the Pastor of the non-denominational evangelical (Mega) Church I attended growing up was (a few years ago) accused of improprieties regarding children and was also arrested for lewd conduct. We hear of stories like this all the time, along with stories of false teachings, charismania (snake handling, laughing, barking, etc.) in the Christian Church but that doesn’t render evangelical Christianity illegitimate.
*********************************************

You are half right.  Sanctification is both God’s work in us and obeying God’s Law:

De 10:16 " So circumcise your heart, and stiffen your neck no longer. “

De 30:6 - "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.”

So which is it? Will God circumcise our hearts or does He want us to circumcise our hearts? It’s both.

Jesus says:
Mt 5:48 - But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.

Yet, we also know that we are made perfect in Him.

Here's another verse that illustrates this joint effort of sanctification:

11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, 12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, 14 who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. (Titus 2)

Shalom,
Chesed

let's define sanctify:

Strong's Greek  #37  hagiazo

1) to render or acknowledge, or to be venerable or hallow

2) to separate from profane things and dedicate to God
a) consecrate things to God
b) dedicate people to God

3) to purify
a) to cleanse externally
b) to purify by expiation: free from the guilt of sin
c) to purify internally by renewing of the soul

I believe this refers to a spiritual purification - not done by works, but by the refining work of the Holy Spirit only.

Circumsicion of the heart is a process that can only be done by the work and power of the Holy Spirit.  It is true that we submit our hearts to Him, but the work is a spiritual process not done by hands.

I believe that the premise of "doing something" for God is the false base from which a Torah observant lifestyle is founded.  There is none righteous.  We are born in sin, and continue to sin for all of our lives.  There is absolutely nothing we can do based on any kind of works to retain salvation, or to make one righteous or sanctified before God.

Righteous and santification come by way of an internal spiritual process.  It is based purely on relationship, not on works.  This is the beauty of what Jesus did for us on the cross.  Man is no longer required "to do" in order to find favor with God.

Obedience to God changes in perspective.  The works that He prepared for us are not rules and regulations.  They are the deeds that He predestined for us to do.  To love our neighbor - to reach out in love and compassion to the lost, the hurting, the helpless, the sick, the distressed.  This what Jesus taught.  It is accomplished however God leads us to do that.  All of our efforts to do good, to be perfect [mature] in Him can only be "good" when they are done in and through His will.

Keeping of the laws never sanctified anyone and never can.  This is why the Messiah came - to cleanse us of the sin, to atone for all of the sins we commit - to change our hearts through rebirth in the Holy Spirit.  No amount of keeping the law will change our hearts - it is a carnal law kept in the flesh.  

We are now born of Spirit and the law we keep is written on our hearts - that law is "scribed" in the law of love, compassion, mercy, in an encompassing view of how we relate to those God has willed and purposed for us to reach out to.  It is also a law of the mind of Christ, which guarantees that the Holy Spirit will convict us of wrong doing, in this we are made Holy as He is Holy.

Being led by the Holy Spirit is the impetus in which we know right from wrong.  We are washed and cleansed continually by staying in the Word of God - it shows us what God expects from us - in attitude, thought, word and deed.  It keeps our hearts pure and in obedience to the law of Christ.  A law that holds us accountable for our thoughts and our actions towards others.  A law that keeps us submitted to the purifying and sanctifying work of the Spirit and thereby, we become imitators of Jesus Christ.

Shalom, Nana

The 3 part writing that I quoted was found on several forums, however; I found a site that posted it also:

http://www.seekgod.ca/highertruth.htm

Shalom, Nana

Hey BigD,

I'll try to keep this shorter, it appears we are in sync on some of the lingo and thinking now, and understand each other better.

I have a few questions I would like to focus on.


If God has only one bride, then how are Gentiles included in that bride?  Bride implies that there is a covenant.  Without a covenant, you cannot be in right relationship with God, so if He has another covenant, then he must have another bride....
Please comment on this, and elaborate on the scriptural basis for your covenant.


What law then did Paul mean that we should judge within the body with in 1 Cor. 6:1-7 (written to Gentiles)-

1 Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? 4 So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, 6 but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?


They never did.  This idea only can be traced back to Hasmonean times (the intra-biblical period where the story of Hannukah took place).  It is clear in the Torah that if someone came to live among them, they had to follow the laws of Israel, (there is to be one law for the native and stranger) but they didn't become "Jews" by doing so.  They could even worship in the Temple/Tabernacle although they could not take of certain sacrifices (like the Passover).


Note that in Eph. 2, the body they are joined to is the commonwealth of Israel.  Paul states that Gentiles are now no longer "strangers" and "aliens", but fellow citizens.  These terms parallel the Torah's usage of "stranger" (Hebrew "ger") and "alien" (Hebrew- "nocher").  A ger was one who lived and resided in Israel and was expected to keep the laws of Israel.  A nocher was a forigner who was just passing through.
Paul was saying that we are to be viewed as fellow citizens.



How can it be not found in prophesy when Paul says the prophets and scripture lay it out in Rom. 16:25-27

25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, 26 but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith; 27 to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, be the glory forever. Amen.

Additionally, those eternal commands lead to an obedience of faith to God through Messiah Jesus.  Is this Paul's gospel or Jesus'?


I didn't read Paul into Jesus, but I read Paul's writings in light of the revelation that God already set down (namely, the Torah, prophets, and the message of Messiah). Here is a hermenutic I think is key- read the epistles assuming they are in line with God's word revealed in the OT or Messiah. In other words, always look at new revelation in the light of the already revealed (the Mormons and Muslims blew this hermenutic), would you agree?


I do think in context Matt. 23:3, Jesus is talking to those who are born under the administration of the Pharasies, and is instructing them to respect their position and rulings in regards to the Torah, but not to act like them (since they were hipocrytical). The Torah gave them that authority (they were sitting in the seat of Moses).

However, I was not born under the law- I am a Gentile.  I have now come under the law of God (aka law of Messiah, Torah), but I am not "under the law" (the government of pysical Israel) as Paul refers to it. (1 Cor. 9:19) I am under the King of Israel.  I would not go and get circumcised to place myself "under the law" because the apostles in Acts 15:7-11 advised against it-

7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 "And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. 10 "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 "But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."

circumcision was the issue to be sure, but what "yolk" (or "burden" in some translations) did circumcision put on the necks of Gentile believers?  It placed them under the authorities of the Pharisee's that Jesus told the disciples they needed to submit to (though carefully since their actions didn't line up with the Torah they were teaching).

In Acts 15:19-21, it is apparent that the Gentiles in question were already associated with the Jewish community per the last statement (in v. 21)-
19 "Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, 20 but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. 21 "For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath."


This letter that the disciples wrote was the one that Paul delivered when he was traveling around.

So BigD, I know you aren't into denominations etc, and neither am I, but I think in conversation it helps to know loosely where the other person is coming from.  I was raised in an evangelical non-denom. (I think non-denominational is a denomination ;) ) which was pastored by a Baptist seminary grad with a doctorate of something (theology I think).  I aslo attended a Christian School (dutch reform) growing up till 8th grade. In high-school I got caught up into the Messianic thing and have moved around in that circle for some time (boy there are alot of whaky things in this circle).  I initially went that direction because all the answers I got for the discrepencies between the OT and NT didn't seem to jive, and all the leaders I asked seemed to have a memorized answer and could not explain it in their own words. I also wanted to study Hebrew, and messianic congregations are a good place to do that.

My position has changed over the years as I study and pray and read.  I like to talk over the scriptures because that is how I come across new information. It has been a pleasure discussing.

Peace and blessings-

-oneBook

MalkyEl -

Lev 20:7-8 Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be holy: for I [am] the LORD your God.  And you shall keep my statutes, and do them: I [am] the LORD who sanctifies you.  

Look, it's both something we do and something God does in us!

The word here in Hebrew is "qadash" which is related to the Hebrew word "qadosh" = holy. Qadash is to make something holy.

Nana, it seems to me that you are confusing the terms salvation with sanctification.

No we are not saved by our works. We are saved by faith. But faith without works is dead.


The only way anyone can please God by keeping Torah, is by having faith in Jesus the Messiah. Good works happen as a result of our faith:

 Eph. 2:8-11 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand (Torah) so that we would walk in them.
 
The work of the Spirit in our lives is the Spirit inspiring us to keep God's Law:

Romans 8:3b-9 He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you.

Chesed quoted:
Lev 20:7-8 Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be holy: for I [am] the LORD your God.  And you shall keep my statutes, and do them: I [am] the LORD who sanctifies you.  
Look, it's both something we do and something God does in us!
The word here in Hebrew is "qadash" which is related to the Hebrew word "qadosh" = holy. Qadash is to make something holy.

Chesed wrote:
Nana, it seems to me that you are confusing the terms salvation with sanctification.
No we are not saved by our works. We are saved by faith. But faith without works is dead.

Nana:
Isa 64:6  But we are all as the unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as a menstruation cloth. And we all fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Nana re-Quote:
I believe that the premise of "doing something" for God is the false base from which a Torah observant lifestyle is founded.  

theBook posted:


oneBook responds:

BigD replies:
The only Gentiles that will be included in "the Bride of Christ" are the proselytes that were converted to Judism.

Israel is "the Bride of Christ." The Church, the Body of Christ, IS NOT "the Bride of Christ."

The marriage supper of the lamb (Rev.19:7) takes place upon the earth. The Chruch, the Body of Christ , will be in heaven at that time, and has no place in the earthly kingdom.

I know of no Scriptural reference that states that the Chruch, the Body of Christ, is the Body of Christ.

Christ is the head of the Chruch, the Body of Christ, and we  more of the bridegroom (Christ) then the Bride. "For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones" (Ephesians 5:30).

BigD posted:

theBook responded:

BigD responds:
In the above passage Paul is speaking of the present civil Laws and teaching that believers should not go to the civil courts against eachother, but handle their disputes through other believers and trust them to make the proper decision.

BigD posted:

theBook responded:


BigD responds:
Abram was a Gentile, However, he became a "Jew in the flesh" after God changed his name to Abraham and required him to be circumcised. See Genesis 17:9-14 for those who were required to be circumcised.

After God gave His instructions in righteousness for the nation of Israel through the Laws of Moses, that was the only way one could be saved/justified. Therefore, if a Gentile wanted to serve the true and living God, that Gentile had to become a Jewish proselyte, and place themselves under the Civil, Moral and Ceremonial Laws of Moses.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

BigD posted:

theBook responded:

BigD replies:
To respond to the above (Ephe. 2:12) I am going to copy from "A Commentary Of EPHESIANS Based upon the Greek New Testament" by Ernest R. Campbell, founder and president of Canyon View Bible College.

I believe that the GNT gives a more accurate translation of the Original.

Also, I will delete the words that are written in the Greek language and will leave a () to indication all deletions.

12."that you were at that time without Christ, having been alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world."

Referring back to the time when they were uncircumcised Gentiles in the flesh, Paul says, "You were at that time without Christ." First, the Greek adverb translated "without" () means apart from and separated from Christ. The name "Christ” () is used in this context with a twofold significance: (1) these Gentiles were without the benefit of Christ's redeeming Blood, and (2) they were without the privilege of being members of His Body. The terrible plight of the Christless Gentiles is lucidly described in Romans 1:18-31.

Second, prior to being saved these Gentiles had been "alienated from the commonwealth of Israel." The Greek participle translated "having been alienated" () is in the perfect tense and passive voice. This means that from a given point of time on God had alienated, estranged, and shut them out of the commonwealth of Israel. The Greek noun rendered "commonwealth" () means that they were alienated from being a citizen, the right to be a citizen, or from citizenship in Israel. God sovereignly chose Abraham as the progenitor of Israel, His special people, and in so doing left the Gentiles outside as aliens (Gen. 12:1-3).

Third, before these Gentiles came to know Christ they were "strangers from the covenants of the promise." The Greek noun for "strangers" speaks of those who are not acquainted with the covenants. The Greek word for "covenants" () is in the plural, which implies that God made several covenants, arrangements, dispositions, and wills with Israel (Gen. 15:18; Ex. 19:5; Num. 25:13). Paul says that they were strangers of the covenants "of the promise." As already noted, the noun translated "covenants" is in the plural, but the word rendered "promise" () is in the singular, the genitive case, and has the article preceding it, and refers to a specific single promise which God made to Israel. This promise probably refers to the fact that God was going to send a Saviour to redeem the fallen Adamic race (Gen. 3:15; Isa. 53:2-6). The covenants made with Israel were sub-parts involved in the fulfillment of this promise. Since God sovereignly chose Israel as the people to whom He gave covenants in conjunction with the fulfillment of His redemptive promise, the Gentiles were strangers and unfamiliar with the covenants related to the promise (Rom. 9:4; 11:26-27; Heb. 9:15-16).

Fourth, we note that before these Gentiles became believers their condition was that of "having no hope." The Greek word for "hope" () means that they had nothing to look forward to, nothing to anticipate and expect in the future but death and subsequent judgment (Heb. 9:27; 10:26-27). The Greek participle rendered "having" is in the present tense and active voice which means that they were a people continuously void of hope. In First Thessalonians 4:13, Paul speaks of those who have died in the Lord, who await resurrection, in contrast to the grief suffered by "the rest who have no hope."

Fifth, Paul affirms that in past time these Gentiles were "without God in the world." The Greek word translated "without God" () is derived from "()" and "()" and literally means that they were a no- God, void-of-God people. This word, transliterated into English, depicts them as atheists. Observe, the sphere in which they are a no God people is "in the world" (). This is the sphere in which Adam and Eve rebelled against God, this is the sphere in which Satan has been given considerable authority (Luke 4:5-6; 2 Cor. 4:4; 1 John 5:19), and this is the sphere out of which God has chosen His elect (Acts 15:14; John 15:19; 1 Cor. 1:27-28). Other spheres which all atheists will occupy are a place of wrath (Rom. 2:5; Eph. 5:16) and the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10, 14).

God Blell.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

BigD posted:

theBook responded:

BigD responds:
When we study Paul's writings, he, more then any other NT writer used the OT Scriptures to show his listeners that Jesus was the Christ. However, the gospel that he preached (the gospel of the grace of God, i.e. salvation by grace through faith alone), and the purpose of the purpose of the cross all part of "the mystery which was kept secret since the world began" (Rm16:25).

The "apostles and prophets mentioned in vs 26 are referring to Paul's fellow laborers. God revealed to them, through the Spirit, that what Paul was saying was of Him.

Had the OT prophets have know what was revealed to Paul, then Paul would have been a liar by saying "which was kept secret since the world began."

BigD posted:

theBookresponded:

BigD responds:
You cannot show me "the gospel of the grace of God" that Paul preached either in the OT or the gospels, or anytime prior to the raising up of the Apostle Paul

You cannot show me the purpose of the Cross prior to the raising up of the Apostle Paul.

You cannot show me where Paul ever preached that one must observe the Laws of Moses, by faith, for their salvation/justification.

What Paul preached was NEW REVELATION apart from what Jesus and the 12 preached. See Galatians 1:11,12 and Ephesians 3:2-10.

What Paul preached was to "the one new man," the "new creation" that God MADE after he set aside the Jews as He did the Gentiles.

God, as this time, is not dealing with Israel as His favorite people; as he has done in the past. God is now dealing with individual believers as members of His Body. There is no longer a distinction between the Jew and Gentile. God is dealing with ALL mankind on equal footing.

BigD posted:

theBook responded:

BigD responds:
Matt. 23:1-3 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: ALL THEREFORE WHATSOEVER THEY BID YOUR OBSERVE, THAT OBSERVE AND DO; BUT DO NOT YE AFTER THEIR WORKS; FOR THEY SAY AND DO NOT.

It appears that this is a COMMAND by Jesus, for all, at that time, to follow. It was the scribes and Pharisees that sat in the Law givers seat. So, if you believe that the Jesus taught that we must do what Jesus preached in the Gospels, then, you are under the Law and pratice what Jesus COMMANDED.

theBook continues:

BigD responed:
I will respond to Acts 15:7-12 later.

It appears to me that you were like the set aside Gentiles in the OT. Now that you want to serve the true and living God, you like they, have placed yourself under the Laws of Moses. They were "the Laws of God" for the children of Israel. Being Israel, as a nation, is set aside, there is no benefit for anyone to be a "spiritual" Israelite. All unsaved Jews and in the same "set aside boat" as the Gentiles of Genesis 11. All saved Jews and Gentiles today are members of the Body of Christ, and not under the Laws of Moses.

God's instructions in righteousness for members of the Body of Christ are found in Paul's Epistles, NOT the Torah.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

theBook goes on:

BigD responds:
When we study Acts 15, it must also be taken in light with Galatians 2. They are both different accounts of the same "council at Jerusalem."

Galatians 2:1 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.

Paul took Titus with him because of the question of Circumcision, Titus was not circumcised.

2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.

It was God who revealed to Paul that he should go to Jerusalem and confer with the Disciples. The phrase "that gospel which I preached among the Gentiles" indicates it was a different gospel then the 12 had been preaching. Had it been the same gospel then there would not have been a need for the meeting.

3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:

This was one of the differences between "the gospel of the grace of God" which Paul was preaching and "the gospel of the kingdom" that the 12 were preaching.

4 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
6 But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:
7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Verse 7 does show that Paul and the 12 were preaching two different gospels. The gospel of uncircumcision is "the gospel of the grace of God" that Paul was preaching, and the gospel of the circumcision was "the gospel of the kingdom" that the 12 had been preaching. The Law was in effect during this preaching.

8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

It is quite apparent that the disciples of Jesus recognized the different gospels they were preaching and recognized that the "so called" great commission could not be carried out at this time. Therefore, they agreed to stay with those Jewish believers who were saved under the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom" and observed the Law.

In Acts 15:5&6 we see that there were believing Pharisees that believeda that Jesus was their Messiah but were also knowledgeable of the Law which required that believers were to be circumcised. That was the reason for "much bebate" in verse 7.

Now getting back to Acts 15:7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe.

8 "And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. 10 "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 "But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."

Peter is gong back to Acts 10 to the point where God had shown him that the Gentiles were no longer to be considered "unclean". (The "middle wall of partition" was not broken down, and the Jew and Gentile are without distinction, and it was NOW lawful for a Jew to go to a Gentile. [cf vs.28]).

Prior to Acts 10, for one be receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, one had to "repent and be baptized" to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38). But since the vision to Peter in Acts 10, we begin go see some changes. The Gentiles in received the gifts of the Holy Ghost WITHOUT any evidence of repentance and NOT being baptized. Cornelius was a man that feared the God of Israel and sought after Him. God had never turned away anyone that sought after Him. Therefore, God sent Peter to Cornelius. Cornelius received the gift of the Holy Ghost even while Peter was talking to him. That is why Peter and those of the circumcision were so astonished (vs 45). That had never happend that way before. Their hearts were cleansed by FAITH ALONE, and not by doing the deeds/works of the Law BY FAITH.

It was the LAW that was they "yoke" that the fathers couldn't bare. Therefore, they tried to establishe their own righteousness, as Paul points out in Romans 10:3).

theBook posted:

BigD responds:
It was the Law that would place a believing Gentile under they authority of the Pharisees. They are the ones who sat in Moses seat and were the administers of the Laws of Moses.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

theBook posted:

BigD responds:
The Gentiles that Peter is speaking of in the above passage are the ones the ones that Paul had converted under the gospel of grace, not the Law. From Galatians 2 we have learned that Paul was preaching a different gospel, and James, Cephas (Peter) and John recognized that in vs 9 and "they gave Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship."

theBook posted:

BigD responds:
Well I consider myself a non-denominational dispensationalist. The Chruch I attend is strictly independant of any other church and God, with His Word is the only authority over us. In fact, the church I attend doesn't even have an official membership. We are a body of like minded believers and you can consider yourself a member if you have a personal relationship with Christ and want to be a member.

I, like you, got my early education in the dutch reformed "christian school".  From my study of the Bible did not jive with what I was taught in school. I was basically taught that I had to live everthing the Bible taught. Believing that had made the Bible a contradictory book when I read it. It was only when I learned that the whole Bible was FOR ME, but not ALL TO ME. It was after I learned the difference between Israel (he subject of prophesy), and the Body of Christ (the subject of "the mystery"), that the Bible became much more understandable.

I too have enjoyed our dialogue. There is a book that I woul like to send you, at my expense, that would really give you the insight into exactly what I believe. It is titled "The MYSTERY" by pastor Joel Finck. It is a very easy read. It will give you a much clearer picture as to what I believe. When ever I study a new book or article; I normally read it twice and have a much better understanding as to what it says.

In order to send it to you, I would need to know your mailing address, which I PROMISE to keep confidential. Also, I will not send any other literature that is not requested.

I will make this offer to anyone that wishes to have a copy of this book.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Nana –

I’m not talking about salvation here. You and I both agree that we are not saved by works. But do you concur that good works should result from a person who is saved? Doesn’t it please God when His children do His good works?

Do you think one who has professed faith in Jesus should be baptized? Do you think anyone is saved by being baptized? Would you say that being baptized is showing symbolically that you are consecrating yourself to God? Would you not say this is for sanctification?

chesed wrote:
I’m not talking about salvation here. You and I both agree that we are not saved by works. But do you concur that good works should result from a person who is saved? Doesn’t it please God when His children do His good works?

Nana:
Yes, we agree that good works do not earn salvation.  Good works do not earn God's favor or blessing.  God's love and grace are not dependent on man's doing.  The moment you say that man "has to do something for God", you take grace and trample it underfoot as if man is more than a breath in time or more than the dust of the earth.

The works that we do have nothing to with man's perception, but of what God has planned for us to do.  The "doing" is what God has purposed for your life to bring Him honor and glory.  Obeying rules to gain His favor is not what He is about.  His law is of a different Kingdom - not made of hands, but of Spirit.

This is why "keeping the Law" whether it be all of Torah, or the Decalogue has no righteousness.  It is not this Law by which God uses us to do His will.  It is a Spiritual Law that is birthed in the Spirit, heart, soul, and mind of a person by the Holy Spirit.

The works that we do out of faith, are works of motive and intent to further the Kingdom of God here.  That is acheived by the Great Commission and the commands of Jesus - to love one another as He has loved us and to love God above all.

chesed wrote:
Do you think one who has professed faith in Jesus should be baptized? Do you think anyone is saved by being baptized? Would you say that being baptized is showing symbolically that you are consecrating yourself to God? Would you not say this is for sanctification?

Nana:
The Bible clearly states that belief in Jesus should be followed by baptism as a further statement of trust and faith in His salvation.  Baptism does not "save" a person.

Many walk in Godliness and are not baptized.  Many are ignorant of some spiritual concepts - this does not make them any less saved.

Baptism shows that we are one in Him.  It is a confession of faith in Jesus - dying to self, being raised in new life.

Baptism does not sanctify a person.  The Holy Spirit sanctifies. Baptism is a statement that we are believers in and followers of Jesus.

Jesus is the Living Water.  He is Baptism.  When you are reborn of Spirit and Water - you are baptized in Spirit and Water in other words.  You are reborn by His process within our hearts, souls, and minds.  We can do nothing to make this process happen or help it along with anything we "do".

Shalom, Nana

Nana posted:
"The Bible clearly states that belief in Jesus should be followed by baptism as a further statement of trust and faith in His salvation.  Baptism does not "save" a person.

Many walk in Godliness and are not baptized.  Many are ignorant of some spiritual concepts - this does not make them any less saved.

Baptism shows that we are one in Him.  It is a confession of faith in Jesus - dying to self, being raised in new life.

Baptism does not sanctify a person.  The Holy Spirit sanctifies. Baptism is a statement that we are believers in and followers of Jesus.

Jesus is the Living Water.  He is Baptism.  When you are reborn of Spirit and Water - you are baptized in Spirit and Water in other words.  You are reborn by His process within our hearts, souls, and minds.  We can do nothing to make this process happen or help it along with anything we "do"."

BigD responds:
Scriptural confirmation PLEASE.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

oneBook wrote:
Scriptural confirmation please.

Nana originally wrote:
"The Bible clearly states that belief in Jesus should be followed by baptism as a further statement of trust and faith in His salvation.  Baptism does not "save" a person."

Nana reply:
John 3
14 And even as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
15 that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18 The one believing into Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Nana original quote:
"Many walk in Godliness and are not baptized.  Many are ignorant of some spiritual concepts - this does not make them any less saved."

Nana reply:
Heb 5:13 for everyone partaking of milk is without experience in the Word of Righteousness, for he is an infant.
14 But solid food is for those full grown, having exercised the faculties through habit, for distinction of both good and bad.

Nana original quote:
"Baptism shows that we are one in Him.  It is a confession of faith in Jesus - dying to self, being raised in new life."

"Baptism does not sanctify a person.  The Holy Spirit sanctifies. Baptism is a statement that we are believers in and followers of Jesus."

Nana reply:
Rom 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Nana original quote:
"Jesus is the Living Water.  He is Baptism.  When you are reborn of Spirit and Water - you are baptized in Spirit and Water in other words.  You are reborn by His process within our hearts, souls, and minds.  We can do nothing to make this process happen or help it along with anything we "do"."

Nana reply:
1 Peter
18 ¶ Because even Christ once suffered concerning sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God; indeed being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit;
19 in which also, going in to the spirits in prison, He then proclaimed
20 to disobeying ones, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, an ark having been prepared, into which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.
21 ¶ Which antitype [Jesus] now also saves us, baptism (not a putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ;
22 who going into Heaven is at the right of God, the angels, and authorities, and powers being subjected to Him).

John 3
5 Jesus answered, Truly, truly, I say to you, If one is not generated out of water and Spirit, he is not able to enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That having been generated out of the flesh is flesh, and that having been generated out of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Do not wonder because I said to you, You must be generated from above.
8 The Spirit breathes where He desires, and you hear His voice; but you do not know from where He comes, and where He goes; so is everyone having been generated from the Spirit.

John 4
10 Jesus answered and said to her, If you knew the gift of God, and who is the One saying to you, Give Me to drink, you would have asked Him, and He would give you living water.
11 The woman said to Him, Sir, You have no vessel, and the well is deep. From where then do You have living water?
12 Are You greater than our father Jacob who gave us the well, and he and his sons and his livestock drank out of it?
13 Jesus answered and said to her, Everyone drinking of this water will thirst again;
14 but whoever may drink of the water which I will give him will not thirst, never! But the water which I will give to him will become a fountain of water in him, springing up into everlasting life.

Shalom, Nana

oneBook wrote:
Scriptural confirmation please.

BigD responds:
It it I (BigD) who posted the above.
-------------------------------
Nana originally wrote:
"The Bible clearly states that belief in Jesus should be followed by baptism as a further statement of trust and faith in His salvation.  Baptism does not "save" a person."

Nana reply:
John 3
14 And even as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
15 that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18 The one believing into Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God.

BigD responds:
Where is water baptism required in the above "proof text."
------------------------
Nana original quote:
"Many walk in Godliness and are not baptized.  Many are ignorant of some spiritual concepts - this does not make them any less saved."

Nana reply:
Heb 5:13 for everyone partaking of milk is without experience in the Word of Righteousness, for he is an infant.
14 But solid food is for those full grown, having exercised the faculties through habit, for distinction of both good and bad.

BigD responds:
Can't find water baptism here either.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

From  chapter 11 of the book "BASIC BIBLE DOCTRINES" by Donald Webb.

(snip)
For by one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Greeks [Gentiles], whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (1 Cor. 12:13)

This verse speaks of the agency[1] of the Holy Spirit as the baptizer, baptizing or, we know this word means, thoroughly identifying us with the Body of Christ. This identification means we were actually placed into the Body of Christ. Turning Romans we learn that this means we were identified with His death:

([1]  At Pentecost, it is the Lord Jesus who did the baptizing. He was the baptizer, and He baptized them with the Holy Spirit, or with the power of the Holy Spirit. Today, the Holy Spirit is the baptizer, and He places us into Christ upon believing. Water baptism has never been a type of Spirit baptism (or a type of death), whether Israel's baptism with the spirit or our baptism by the Spirit.)

Know ye not that, as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death (Romans 6:3)?

Verse 4 continues:

Therefore, we are buried with Him by baptism into death, that as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4).

Verse 5 actually gives us the Holy Spirit's confirmation of the meaning of this word baptism by using a phrase that is an exact equivalent:

For if we have been planted together [this is the phrase that means the same thing as the word baptism] in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection (Romans 6:5).

Colossians 2:12 is also an important verse on this subject. Here we learn two important aspects of this baptism:

Buried with Him in baptism, in which also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead (Colossians 2:12).

This phrase, buried with Him in baptism, means buried with Him in identification with death, literally, placed into His death and burial. This baptism is part of our threefold completeness in Christ. Verse 11 refers to our death with Christ by the word circumcised. Verse 12 refers to our burial and resurrection with Christ. also learn that this whole operation - our death, burial, and resurrection - wasoperation of God - not of any clergyman! Furthermore, this baptism must have taken place at the moment of salvation, because verse 13 declares that this when we were quickened together or made alive together with Him. This is the moment of spiritual regeneration of which Titus 3:5 speaks so clearly.

When we were planted in the likeness of His death is something that Scripture makes perfectly clear. It was at the moment of salvation - the moment we believed the gospel we were identified with Christ. This is when we were placed into Christ and sealed with the Holy Spirit - all in one glorious instant.

This is something with which most fundamental Christians, including most Baptists, will agree. Most who hold to water baptism today do not believe that it is necessary for salvation. Nonetheless, the reasons men water baptize today are unscriptural ones - which were not even correct when water baptism was a part of God's program. Water baptism has never been a type of Spirit baptism, or a type of death, or a simple public testimony!

In this dispensation we are to guard the one baptism because of the glorious calling it represents, and we are to make a clear distinction between it and water baptism which represents the kingdom calling. There is only one baptism in this dispensation of grace and to add water would make two baptisms, which would be unscriptural. This would only confuse the truth for this present dispensation.
(snip)

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Nana original quote:
"Jesus is the Living Water.  He is Baptism.  When you are reborn of Spirit and Water - you are baptized in Spirit and Water in other words.  You are reborn by His process within our hearts, souls, and minds.  We can do nothing to make this process happen or help it along with anything we "do"."

Nana reply:
1 Peter
18 ¶ Because even Christ once suffered concerning sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God; indeed being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit;
19 in which also, going in to the spirits in prison, He then proclaimed
20 to disobeying ones, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, an ark having been prepared, into which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.
21 ¶ Which antitype [Jesus] now also saves us, baptism (not a putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ;
22 who going into Heaven is at the right of God, the angels, and authorities, and powers being subjected to Him).

BigD responds:

First of all, my Bible (KJV) renders vs 20 "...saved BY water."

Peter here in this letter is writing to Jewish believers who were saved under the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom" when water baptism was a requirement for salvation. Peter here IS NOT writing to members of the Body of Christ where the rite of water baptism is a requirement. These are the same ones that James, Cephas (Peter) and John agreed, with Paul in Gal. 2:9, that they would stay with the circumcision (Jews) while Paul and Banabas when to the heathen (Gentiles.)

Nana continues:
John 3
5 Jesus answered, Truly, truly, I say to you, If one is not generated out of water and Spirit, he is not able to enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That having been generated out of the flesh is flesh, and that having been generated out of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Do not wonder because I said to you, You must be generated from above.
8 The Spirit breathes where He desires, and you hear His voice; but you do not know from where He comes, and where He goes; so is everyone having been generated from the Spirit.

BigD resonds:
Water baptism is not the subject in the above passages. My KJV of the Bible renders the verse "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be BORN of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The word "BORN" in the original Greek is "gennao" and according to Strong's Greek Dictionary of the New Testament (1080) the meaning is: "from a var. of 1085; to procreate (prop. of father, but by extens. of the mother); fig. to regenerate;-bear, beget, be born, bring forth, conceive, be delivered of, gender, make, spring."

So, in the above passages we are not talking about water baptism, but natural birth through the birth cannal. A believer does have two births, the natural birth and spiritual birth.

Nana continues:
John 4
10 Jesus answered and said to her, If you knew the gift of God, and who is the One saying to you, Give Me to drink, you would have asked Him, and He would give you living water.
11 The woman said to Him, Sir, You have no vessel, and the well is deep. From where then do You have living water?
12 Are You greater than our father Jacob who gave us the well, and he and his sons and his livestock drank out of it?
13 Jesus answered and said to her, Everyone drinking of this water will thirst again;
14 but whoever may drink of the water which I will give him will not thirst, never! But the water which I will give to him will become a fountain of water in him, springing up into everlasting life.

BigD asks:
Where is water baptism in the above passages?

The use of the word "water" in the Bible doesn't ALWAYS refer to water baptism.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Hey BigD, I got the book a few nights ago, and I am on chapter 3.  I just wanted to let you know.

I'll wait till I'm done and start a new thread on this subject.

Thanks for the book.

-oneBook

BigD responds:
Really GLAD to hear that you got the book and are reading it.

Am looking forward to any comments you may have concerning it contents. Even if you don't agree with what is presented, I would enjoy discussing any portion of it.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!