DISCUSSION FORUMS
MAIN MENU
Home
Help
Advanced Search
Recent Posts
Site Statistics
Who's Online
Forum Rules
Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
Community
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
Shop
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
Read
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
Connect
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
Graphics
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
Webmasters
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

ChristiansUnite
Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
January 20, 2018, 04:02:06 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Our Lord Jesus Christ loves you.
278174 Posts in 26566 Topics by 3790 Members
Latest Member: Goodwin
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  ChristiansUnite Forums
|-+  Theology
| |-+  Bible Study (Moderator: admin)
| | |-+  IS Matthew Mark Luke and John in the New
« previous next »
Poll
Question: IS Matthew, Mark,  Luke  and John in the New Testament
YES - 11 (68.8%)
NO - 4 (25%)
NOT SURE - 1 (6.3%)
MAYBE - 0 (0%)
SOME PARTS - 0 (0%)
Total Voters: 14

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: IS Matthew Mark Luke and John in the New  (Read 6292 times)
BigD
Guest
« Reply #30 on: September 15, 2004, 05:45:10 PM »

BigD posted:
God's original covenant with Abram in Genesis was unconditional. That the world would be blessed through his seed Israel.

When God required Abraham to be circumcised, it did not change the original covenant but added a condition to it. It meant that Abraham's seed had to now be circumcised or "be cut off forever." The Sabbath Day requirement was also added later.

Reresponded:
It did not change the covenant but added a condition to it? That is double talk. If as you say the covenant is/was unconditional adding a condition is a surly a change.

BigD replies:
Call it what you wish. I didn't do it; God did. Yes, the added condition was the change.

----------------------------------------------------------
BigD posted:
When God gave Laws to Moses, it did not change the original covenant but added still more conditions to it. The original covenat is still left unfulfilled.

The old covenant to Abram seed Israel is now null and void while the nation of Israel is in a "set aside" state. "...until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written. There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant, when I shall take away their sin" (Rms11:25-27).

Reba responded:
If the covenant is null and void it is no longer a covanent. Also to render the covenant null and void again speeks of conditions or it would still be viable.  

BigD replies:

The covenant with Abrahams seed has was/and is in a suspended condition during this period that Israel is presently set aside. That happened after the stoning of Stephen. So, in effect, the covenant is temporarily "null and void." All Jews are presently on the same footing and without distinction from the Gentiles. The Jew became equal with the Gentile when they were set aside. The Gentiles were set aside at the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11. "For God hath concluded them all (Jews and Gentiles) in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all" Romans 11:32.

The original unconditional covenat WILL BE fulfilled at a still future date.
-----------------------------------------------------------
BigD posted:
The old original covenant with Abram will be fulfilled when the Chruch, the Body of Christ is raptured to heaven. God will then again deal with Abram's seed Israel, and Israel will again be under the Law.

Reba responded:
Do you see how this statement make the Cross of our Lord Jesus of no value. There are how many salvations, Only the cross.

Heb 5:9

9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
KJV

BigD replies:
I fail to see that my above statement makes the Cross of our Lord Jesus of no value.  Tell me now, Were the children of Israel, in the OT and during the Gospels, saved by believing/doing  the Cross work of Christ, or doing the deeds and works of the Law by FAITH? Also, are we believers today saved by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH, or by putting our FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ? Were Adam and Ever saved by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH or putting their FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ? How about Noah, How was he saved, by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH, or by putting his FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ? Lets not forget about Abram/Abraham. Was he saved by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH, or by putting his FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ?

Stop and think Reba; They were all saved by believing/doing what God required at that point in time of human history. We today are saved by believing what God requires at this point in time of human history, i.e. Faith in the Cross work (death burial and resurrection) of Christ.

Jesus said in Matthew 15:24 "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Paul says in Romans 15:8 "Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers."

The promises were to the Jewish fathers was that they were to have a King that would sit on Davids throne forever. Before Jesus began His earthly ministry: John the Baptist preached "the Kingdom at hand." Jesus preached, and instructed His disciples to preach, "the Kingdom at hand." According to OT prophesy, the Kingdom was at hand, because the King was present on the earth. So why wasn't the kingdom established?

Well, two things must happen before the kingdom can be established upon the earth. The 70th week of Daniel 9:25-27 (the Tribulation) must happen, and also, Jesus said, speaking of Himself, in Luke 17:25 "But first mujst he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation."

Hebrews 5:9 does say: "He BECAME the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;" Before Jesus became the author of eternal salvation unto all that obey him, He had to die upon the Cross of Calvary to pay for all the sins of the world. Prior to that time, the animal sacrifices and other requirements of the Law only covered past sins that were commmitted. They didn't cover future sins. That is why it was done on a continual basis. Hebrews 10:4-12 tell us how Jesus became the "once for all" sacrifice", of which the old animal sacrifces were a shadow and type.

The Cross was God's eternal purpose for the salvation of ALL mankind. However, the purpose of the Cross was never revealed until God raised up the Apostle Paul.
---------------------------------------------
BigD posted:
However, Israel will still have to go through the Tribulation that started in Acts 2: 15-20, and was interrupted when God set the nation of Israel aside after the stoning of Stephen. At the end of the Tribulation; Christ will return to establish His Kingdom and Jeremiah 31:31-34, the "new covenant" will be then take place. Jesus said in Matthew 26:29 "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, UNTIL THAT DAY WHEN I DRINK IT NEW WITH YOU IN MY FATHER'S KINGDOM."

Reba responded:
The position I understand I spent over 40 years under dispensational teaching. Let me pose a few questions for your last paragraph.

You say Israel will go through the trib…

BigD replies:
Yes, read Daniel 9 and also Matthew 24 and Mark 13 and Luke 21. The are other OT Scriptures that I can look up, but I'm not going to take the time right now.


Reba continues:
What is Israel? What makes a person an Israeli?  Is it the ‘natural blood? As in DNA.  How much Israeli DNA is needed to say one is an Israeli? Does one have to be born in Israel are the Jews of New York, Florida, Israelis?  How does the blood of one parents lead to salvation? When we know salvation is His Cross.

You say the Israel will be under the law. Do you really believe after God sent Jesus to the Cross HE will again accept the blood of bulls and goats?

Heb 10:4-10

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.

7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
KJV

BigD responds:
Israel is the land that God promised to the Jewish nation. An Israili is one from the nation of Israel. I am a dutchman by heritage because my grandparents on both sides came from Holland.  I am an American by citizenship.

The blood of one parent does not necessarily lead to salvation. However it could and pray that it does.

In Luke 22:30 Jesus told His disciples: "That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Which to me says that Jesus returns and sets up His kingdom, there are Laws to be observed, and if there weren't, there would be no need for judges. The Laws will be written on their hearts.

God Bless.
Live Well,  Laugh Often,  Love the Lord!
Logged
Reba
Guest
« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2004, 05:59:28 PM »

Where in God's Word does He say the covenant with Abe is unconditional?


Quote
BigD responds:
Israel is the land that God promised to the Jewish nation. An Israili is one from the nation of Israel. I am a dutchman by heritage because my grandparents on both sides came from Holland.  I am an American by citizenship.....

However, Israel will still have to go through the Tribulation that started in Acts 2: 15-20, and was interrupted when God set the nation of Israel aside after the stoning of Stephen. At the end of the Tribulation; Christ will return to establish His Kingdom and Jeremiah 31:31-34, the "new covenant" will be then take place. Jesus said in Matthew 26:29 "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, UNTIL THAT DAY WHEN I DRINK IT NEW WITH YOU IN MY FATHER'S KINGDOM."

 Are you saying only Jews born in Israel will go through the trib?

Logged
ollie
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2215


Being born again, .....by the word of God,


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: September 15, 2004, 06:50:06 PM »

Yes,

They are mentioned in the New Testament as heirs to the promise of God through their faith in Jesus Christ. As all who are faithful are mentioned as heirs to the promise.

ollie
Logged

Support your local Christian.
BigD
Guest
« Reply #33 on: September 15, 2004, 08:02:55 PM »

Reba:
I will answer your questions above when you answer the ones I asked you in my last post to you.

I will repeat them for you:
BigD replies:
 Tell me now, Were the children of Israel, in the OT and during the Gospels, saved by believing/doing  the Cross work of Christ, or doing the deeds and works of the Law by FAITH? Also, are we believers today saved by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH, or by putting our FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ? Were Adam and Ever saved by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH or putting their FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ? How about Noah, How was he saved, by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH, or by putting his FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ? Lets not forget about Abram/Abraham. Was he saved by doing the deeds/works of the Law by FAITH, or by putting his FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ?

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!
Logged
Shammu
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 32182


B(asic) I(nstructions) B(efore) L(eaving) E(arth)


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: September 16, 2004, 03:05:01 AM »

Where in God's Word does He say the covenant with Abe is unconditional?


Quote
BigD responds:
Israel is the land that God promised to the Jewish nation. An Israili is one from the nation of Israel. I am a dutchman by heritage because my grandparents on both sides came from Holland.  I am an American by citizenship.....

However, Israel will still have to go through the Tribulation that started in Acts 2: 15-20, and was interrupted when God set the nation of Israel aside after the stoning of Stephen. At the end of the Tribulation; Christ will return to establish His Kingdom and Jeremiah 31:31-34, the "new covenant" will be then take place. Jesus said in Matthew 26:29 "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, UNTIL THAT DAY WHEN I DRINK IT NEW WITH YOU IN MY FATHER'S KINGDOM."

 Are you saying only Jews born in Israel will go through the trib?


Yes when God seals his 144,000 witnesses to go forth and testify Gods word.

Right off hand I don't know the chapter or verse but, it is in the Book of revelations.
Logged

BigD
Guest
« Reply #35 on: September 16, 2004, 04:50:09 AM »

DreamWeaver:
FYI, the Tribulation that started in Acts 2:15-20, and was interrupted when God set the nation of Israel aside after the stoning of Stephen, will resume after the rapture of the Chruch. All member of the Body of Christ will be in heaven.

The only one remaining on the earth will expreience the Tribulation qnd Great Tribulation. That mumber will include all the unsaved in the world plus the sealed 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7:4-8. They are "the little flock" that will be responsible for the savlation of "great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations and kindreds, and people and tongues" mentioned in verse 9.

God Bless.
Live well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!
Logged
Brother Love
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4224


"FAITH ALONE IN CHRIST ALONE"


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: September 16, 2004, 06:04:42 AM »

QUOTE BigD:

DreamWeaver:
FYI, the Tribulation that started in Acts 2:15-20, and was interrupted when God set the nation of Israel aside after the stoning of Stephen, will resume after the rapture of the Chruch. All member of the Body of Christ will be in heaven.

The only one remaining on the earth will expreience the Tribulation qnd Great Tribulation. That mumber will include all the unsaved in the world plus the sealed 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7:4-8. They are "the little flock" that will be responsible for the savlation of "great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations and kindreds, and people and tongues" mentioned in verse 9.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I agree 100% AMEN!!!!
« Last Edit: September 16, 2004, 06:11:51 AM by Brother Love » Logged


THINGS THAT DIFFER By C.R. Stam
Read it on line for "FREE"

http://www.geocities.com/protestantscot/ttd/ttd_chap1.html

<Smiley))><
Allinall
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2650


HE is my All in All.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: September 16, 2004, 11:47:11 AM »

GOOD NITE GERTY!!!![/b] Could[/b] we get ANY more Hyper Dipsy in here?  Come on!  "Is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the New Testament?"  Next we'll be asking if that means there's more than one gospel!  Oh wait...that nut's already been cracked.

Speakin' of cracked...BL?   Grin
Logged



"that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death"
Shammu
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 32182


B(asic) I(nstructions) B(efore) L(eaving) E(arth)


View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: September 16, 2004, 11:22:05 PM »

GOOD NITE GERTY!!!![/b] Could[/b] we get ANY more Hyper Dipsy in here?  Come on!  "Is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the New Testament?"  Next we'll be asking if that means there's more than one gospel!  Oh wait...that nut's already been cracked.

Speakin' of cracked...BL?   Grin
Well we know you are a little cracked Allinall. Tongue Wink
Logged

BigD
Guest
« Reply #39 on: September 17, 2004, 04:11:46 AM »

Part 1

GOOD NITE GERTY!!!![/b] Could[/b] we get ANY more Hyper Dipsy in here?  Come on!  "Is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the New Testament?"  Next we'll be asking if that means there's more than one gospel!  Oh wait...that nut's already been cracked.

Speakin' of cracked...BL?   ;D

BigD responds:
I AM NOT A HYPER-DISPENSATIONALIST!!!. However, I am not offended when I am refered to as one.

When I am asked my church affiliation, I usually respond by saying that I am what is refered to as a hyper/extreme dispensationalist. That brings on the responce "What's that?" that question give me the opportunity to present the gospel of the grace of God.

The following is taken from a past issue of the Berean Searchlight.

ARE WE HYPER-DISPENSATIONAILSTS:
By David M. Havard

Keywords: hyperdispensationalism, ultradispensationalism, dispensationalism, H. A. Ironside, Charles Baker, Pastor C. R. Stam, E. W. Bullinger, J. C. O'Hair, revelation of the mystery, body of Christ, Paul's gospel, gospel of the grace of God, Apostle Paul, rightly dividing the word of truth

Many years ago, H. A. Ironside1 published a booklet entitled Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth in which he threw Charles Baker and C. R. Stam into the same bucket as E. W. Bullinger. Ever since then, we have been labeled as having the same extreme views as Bullinger. Men who have never looked into what we really teach continue to spread the slander started by Ironside back in the 1930's. Besides, it's much easier to label us as "hyper" and dismiss us than it is to address us based on the Scriptures.

This was recently done again in the July/August 1999 issue of Uplook magazine (published by the Plymouth Brethren). In this their Dispensationalism Issues issue, they presented an excellent overview of dispensationalism. As a matter of fact, we would agree with the majority of what was written. But then, one writer had to add this statement:

"One final word. Like all good things, the study of dispensations can be abused. There are some Christians who carry dispensationalism to such an extreme that they accept only Paul's Prison Epistles as applicable for the church today. As a result, they do not accept baptism or the Lord's Supper, since these are not found in the Prison Epistles. They also teach that Peter's gospel message was not the same as Paul's….These people are sometimes called ultra-dispensationalists or Bullingerites (after a teacher named E. W. Bullinger). Their extreme view of dispensationalism should be rejected."2

This article was then followed by the following excerpt from Ironside's book:3

"What is Bullingerism or Ultra-dispensationalism? This system was first advocated some years ago by Dr. E. W. Bullinger (1837-1913), who was educated at King's College, London, and was a clergyman in the Church of England. These views have been widely spread through the notes of the Companion Bible which he edited. Dr. Bullinger's positions are glaringly opposed to what is generally accepted as orthodox teaching. This movement has been carried forth in our day by ardent proponents such as Cornelius Stam, J. C. O'Hair and Charles Baker.

"There are a number of outstanding tenets of Ultra-dispensationalism. First, it is insisted that the four Gospels are entirely Jewish and have no real message for the Church. Secondly, it is maintained that in the book of Acts we do not have the Church, the Body of Christ, but that the word ekklesia (church), as it is used in that book refers to a different Church altogether than that of Paul's Prison Epistles. Thirdly, it is contended that Paul did not receive his special revelation of the mystery of the Body until his imprisonment in Rome, and that his Prison Epistles alone reveal this truth and are, strictly speaking, the only portion of the Holy Scriptures given to the members of His Body. All of the other epistles of Paul are relegated to an earlier dispensation and were for the instruction of the so-called Jewish Church of that time. Fourthly, the Christian ordinances, having been given before Paul, are supposed to have no real connection with the present economy, and therefore are relegated to the past, and may again have a place in the future Great Tribulation.

"Beside these points, there are many other unscriptural things which are advocated by Bullingerism. Many boldly advocate the sleep of the soul between death and resurrection, the annihilation of the wicked, the universal salvation of all men and demons, the denial of the eternal Sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the denial of the personality of the Holy Spirit. All these evil doctrines find congenial soil in Bullingerism or Ultra-dispensationalism."

"But wait!" You're thinking, "I don't believe those things!" Well, neither do I, but these are their tactics. As far as most Acts 2 folks are concerned, we agree with Bullinger's far out views regarding soul sleep, annihilation of the wicked, universalism, and that the Body of Christ did not start until Acts 28. You either believe in their interpretation of dispensationalism or you are an extremist like Bullinger. They do not recognize any middle ground. This is what we are up against.

In the above quote, Ironside lists some the "outstanding tenets" of what he calls "ultra-dispensationalism." While this is a convenient label, it does not Biblically address the issues. Let us examine what Ironside said (and everyone else seems to repeat) and see if we agree or not.

"First, it is insisted that the four Gospels are entirely Jewish and have no real message for the Church": We do not believe that the four gospels have no real message for the church—Paul says that ALL Scripture is profitable. However, we do believe (because we hold to a literal historical interpretation of the Bible) that Christ's earthly ministry was in keeping with Israel's prophetic kingdom program (Matt. 10:5-6; 15:24). We find application in the gospels to be sure, but to say that the basic message of the gospels is directed to the Body of Christ is not being consistent or literal. As Scofield says in his reference Bible, "The Epistles of the Apostle Paul have a very distinctive character....Through Paul alone we know that the church is not an organization, but an organism, the Body of Christ; instinct with His life, and heavenly in calling, promise, and destiny. Through him alone we know the nature, purpose, and form of organization of local churches, and the right conduct of such gatherings. Through him alone do we know that `we shall not all sleep,' that `the dead in Christ shall rise first,' and that living saints shall be `changed' and caught up to meet the Lord in the air at His return. But to Paul was also committed the unfolding of the doctrines of grace…Paul, converted by the personal ministry of the Lord in glory, is distinctively the witness to a glorified Christ, Head over all things to the church which is His Body, as the Eleven were to Christ in the flesh." And if, according to traditional dispensationalism, the Body of Christ started at Pentecost, how can it be found retroactively in the gospels? The message that Peter preached at Pentecost was an offer of the millennial kingdom to Israel (Acts 2:22) conditional upon their repentance and recognition of Jesus as their Messiah—something that we now know will not happen until after the tribulation.
(To be cont'd)

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Lover the Lord!
Logged
BigD
Guest
« Reply #40 on: September 17, 2004, 04:14:43 AM »

Part 2
ARE WE HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISTS?

Part 2:
"Secondly, it is maintained that in the book of Acts we do not have the Church, the Body of Christ, but that the word ekklesia (church), as it is used in that book, refers to a different Church altogether than that of Paul's Prison Epistles": You'd think they would at least understand this! Regarding the assembly in the book of Acts, we have both "churches" mentioned, depending on the context. If you see the Body of Christ in the gospels, you are closer to a covenant position than a dispensational one. If the Body is found in the gospels, then to be consistent, it also has to be found in the Old Testament prophetic program as well. It was Bullinger (with whom we do not agree) who said that the Body of Christ did not start until the close of the book of Acts and that only Paul's prison epistles are for us today.

"Thirdly, it is contended that Paul did not receive his special revelation of the mystery of the Body until his imprisonment in Rome, and that his Prison Epistles alone reveal this truth and are, strictly speaking, the only portion of the Holy Scriptures given to the members of His Body": We do not agree with Bullinger on this point either. We do say that Paul received a special revelation (Gal. 1:11-12), but we do not agree that only his prison epistles are applicable to us today. Paul began to receive his special revelation of the mystery upon his conversion in Acts 9.

"Fourthly, the Christian ordinances, having been given before Paul, are supposed to have no real connection with the present economy, and therefore are relegated to the past, and may again have a place in the future Great Tribulation": Regarding the "ordinances" of the church, there is no place in Scripture where water baptism and the Lord's supper are linked. The Lord's Supper is a memorial that we are instructed in I Corinthians 11 to keep "until He come." However, we do feel that water baptism is a Jewish ordinance and is something that was phased out during the transition period. It is also rarely pointed out that we are not unique in understanding that water baptism is not for today. Other groups throughout church history, such as the Quakers, have also come to this same conclusion.

"Many boldly advocate the sleep of the soul between death and resurrection, the annihilation of the wicked, the universal salvation of all men and demons, the denial of the eternal Sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the denial of the personality of the Holy Spirit. All these evil doctrines find congenial soil in Bullingerism or Ultra-dispensationalism": This is the worst sort of guilt by association, but I'm sure you see the implication. If you believe in a mid-Acts position, then, according to them, you also believe in these extreme and unscriptural viewpoints as well. By associating us with these cult-like beliefs we can be discredited without ever having to answer our Biblical arguments.

This is what we are up against. These are the same battles, misunderstandings, and deliberate misrepresentations that Pastor Stam has had to fight against for over 60 years—and we must continue to do so today if the gospel of the grace of God is going to continue to go forward.

Yet rather than discourage us, these things should motivate us. We know what we have found. We know how confused we used to be. We can honestly say that this is a more consistent and literal approach to Scripture. We no longer have to explain away what the Bible clearly says in verses such as Acts 2:38. We know that by reading the Body of Christ back into the gospels, we rob them of their distinctive kingdom character. By not understanding the difference we either have to make the clear statements in the gospels (such as a distinction between Jew and Gentile and water baptism) conform to Paul's epistles (where he says there is no difference between Jew and Greek, and that he is the apostle to the Gentiles) by explaining them away or we have to read the gospels into Paul's epistles and make them conform to the message in the gospels (which is what John MacArthur has done with "Lordship Salvation").

We are not the wild-eyed radicals that the theological media tries to portray us as. We are in agreement with the overwhelming majority of traditional dispensationalism. Our two primary points of disagreement are that we see the Body of Christ starting with the conversion and call of the Apostle Paul and that water baptism is not a requirement for this dispensation.

Let us stand firm in proclaiming the unique message revealed to and through the Apostle Paul. It is like telling others about our faith in Christ. We know what it has done for us. We know that it has cleared away our confusion. Let us graciously and boldly share with others what this message has done for us.

Endnotes

1. If you can find someone who has a copy of The Controversy (it's now out of print), you can read more about Ironside's history as related to the Grace Movement.

2. William MacDonald, "Distinguishing things that differ," Up-look, July/August 1999, pp. 11-12.

3. Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, H. A. Ironside, Loizeaux Brothers, New York, 1938.

God Bless.
Logged
Allinall
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2650


HE is my All in All.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: September 17, 2004, 11:23:36 AM »

GOOD NITE GERTY!!!![/b] Could[/b] we get ANY more Hyper Dipsy in here?  Come on!  "Is Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the New Testament?"  Next we'll be asking if that means there's more than one gospel!  Oh wait...that nut's already been cracked.

Speakin' of cracked...BL?   Grin
Well we know you are a little cracked Allinall. Tongue Wink

I am NOT[/b] cracked...er...Mr. Dreamweaver, Sir.   Grin Wink
Logged



"that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death"
Allinall
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2650


HE is my All in All.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #42 on: September 17, 2004, 11:45:49 AM »

BigD,

I'm not concerned with what you call yourself (apart from "Brother"  Smiley).  In truth, the entire Bible is about Jesus Christ.  It's message is one of reconciling manking to God through Jesus Christ.  That means of reconciliation has been, and always will be based upon believing God.  God's message has not changed throughout the dispensations.  God's means towards attaining that reconciliation has not changed throughout the dispensations.  To believe so is to have a false understanding of the entire word...  

>>>>Note here: I do not mean by this that I have a complete understanding of that word, but rather that one must take the word as a whole to understand THE Gospel message.  It doesn't contradict.  It reveals.<<<<

...Rather, God's message has been revealed to a greater extent in each dispensation.  Simply Brothers, to continue on this doctrine, regardless of degree or fame, is to get caught up in the very "wives tales" we're told to avoid.  It does nothing.  We hold to the same message of salvation.  Believing that God saved men in different fashions in different ages is moot, whether or not it is incorrect or not.  To what benefit is it to decide that the Gospels should be in the Old Testament or not?
Logged



"that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death"
BigD
Guest
« Reply #43 on: September 17, 2004, 01:10:13 PM »

BigD,

I'm not concerned with what you call yourself (apart from "Brother"  :)).  In truth, the entire Bible is about Jesus Christ.  It's message is one of reconciling manking to God through Jesus Christ.  That means of reconciliation has been, and always will be based upon believing God.  God's message has not changed throughout the dispensations.  God's means towards attaining that reconciliation has not changed throughout the dispensations.  To believe so is to have a false understanding of the entire word...  

>>>>Note here: I do not mean by this that I have a complete understanding of that word, but rather that one must take the word as a whole to understand THE Gospel message.  It doesn't contradict.  It reveals.<<<<

...Rather, God's message has been revealed to a greater extent in each dispensation.  Simply Brothers, to continue on this doctrine, regardless of degree or fame, is to get caught up in the very "wives tales" we're told to avoid.  It does nothing.  We hold to the same message of salvation.  Believing that God saved men in different fashions in different ages is moot, whether or not it is incorrect or not.  To what benefit is it to decide that the Gospels should be in the Old Testament or not?

BigD responds:
You are the one that has stared the classification of those who post on this board.  If you were not concerned then why do you single out those you think are hyper-dispensationalists?

Dispensationalism is just a manner/means by which one studies the Scriptures. It is not a religeous denomination.

I know of Baptist, Pentecostals and many independants that consider themselves dispensationalist. I have met many people that claimed that were not dispensationalists who will now say that they are "dispensationalists of a sort."

If you insist that you are not a dispenationalist , but do not belive that animal sacrifice for the atonement for sins is required for today, then you are a "dispensationalist of sorts". If you do not believe that circumcision is required today, then you are "dispensationalist of a sort." If you do not keep all the Sabbath Day (Saturday) Laws, as required under the Law, then you are a "dispensationalist of a sort."

As a "dispensationalist", I believe that the attributes of God never change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. However, I also believe that the manner in which God has dealt with mankind through the ages. I can't find where Adam and Eve were ever required to offer up animals for salvation/justification. God gave them a consience to live by to help them to now determine what was right or wrong.

Able was not saved/justified by building an Ark. He was saved/justified in bringing the offering that God required.

Noah was not saved/justified by counting the star in heaven. He and his faimily were saved by building an ark as God required.

Abram was not saved/justified offering Isaac as a sacrifice. He was saved/justified by just believing God when God told him to look up and count the stars in the heaven.

Abraham was not saved/juistified by keeping the CIVIL, MORAL and CEREMONIAL LAWS of Moses. He was saved/justified by offering his son Issac on an altar.

After the children of Israel were given the CIVIL, MORAL and CEREMONIAL LAWS of Moses, they were not saved/justified by putting their faith and trust in the Cross work (death, burial resurrection) of Christ, as members of "the Body of Christ", the Church do today.

So, from the above, you should be able to see that God has dealt differently with mankind throughout human history, AND His attributes never changed. Also, it shows "progressive revelation" by God.

There are no set amount of dispensations that one can find in the Bible. Paul in Ephesians 2 mentions three (3) dispensations. In verses 11, 12 he mentions "TIMES PAST" when the Gentiles were uncircumcised and outside the commonwealth of of Israel.

In verses 14-18 he talks about the "BUT NOW" time when the "middle wall of partition" between the Jew and Gentile was broken down, and the formation of "the one new man", the Body of Christ.

In verse 7 he speaks of "THE AGES TO COME", which all look forward to.

MOST who study the Bible from a dispensational point of view agree pretty much that there are 7 MAJOR dispensations recorded in the Bible. The one big area of disagreement in the dispensational ranks is when did the "dispensation of grace" begin.

The majority view amongst dispensationalis is the the Church, the Body of Christ, started at Pentecost in Acts 2.

Then there are the mid-Acts/Acts 9 dispies who believe that the dispensation of grace started after the stoning of Stephen and the raising up of the Apostle Paul. (That is my understaning from Scripture.)

Then we get to the Acts 28:28 dispies who believe that it started then; when Paul received the "full knowledge" of the mystery.

If you would like, I will post an outline of the 7 major dispensations, from the mid-Acts/Acts 7 position. Just let me know.

If it is you wish not to study the Bible from a dispensational viewpoint, that is you previlage. However, I have a better understanding of the Bible when I study it in that manner.

Prior to studying in that manner, the Bible was a book of seemingly contradictions. But now instead of contradictions, I can see transitions from one dispensation to the other. Therefore it became my choice of study.

I was taught that ALL the Bible was written TO ME. But I now believe that is ALL written FOR ME but not ALL TO ME. Therefore I study the entire Bible.

I have learned that from the "LAWS OF MOSES" to the setting aside of Israel, salvation/justification was by doing the deeds/works of the LAW by FAITH. Those Laws were given by God to Moses for the children of Israel as their instructions in righteousness.

From the setting aside of Israel and the ushering in of the dispensation of grace, our salvation/justification is by FAITH ONLY in the Cross work of Christ. Our salvation is a "free gift" of God to all those will put their FAITH and trust in His Cross works, no deed/works of the Law required. The instructions in righteousness for members of "the Body of Christ" were given by God to the Apostle Paul. Paul is the Apostle to "the Body of Christ;" just as Moses was God's spokesperson to the children of Isreal.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!
Logged
Allinall
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2650


HE is my All in All.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: September 17, 2004, 02:41:02 PM »

Quote
BigD responds:
You are the one that has stared the classification of those who post on this board.  If you were not concerned then why do you single out those you think are hyper-dispensationalists?

Because the Hyper-Dispensationalist viewpoint is what is being proported.  Whether you claim to be one or not is of no concern, hence "...I'm not concerned."  This viewpoint, as I stated, is unbiblical, and does nothing for this body of believers to continually have thrust in our faces.  The continual "thrusting" leads one to believe that the sole purpose for presenting this is arguementation for self gratification.  Again, pointless.

Quote
Dispensationalism is just a manner/means by which one studies the Scriptures. It is not a religeous denomination.

I know of Baptist, Pentecostals and many independants that consider themselves dispensationalist. I have met many people that claimed that were not dispensationalists who will now say that they are "dispensationalists of a sort."

I understand exactly what Dispensationalism is, and consider myself a Dispensationalist.  I also understand what Hyper-Dispensationalism is and know it to be unbiblical.

Quote
If you insist that you are not a dispenationalist , but do not belive that animal sacrifice for the atonement for sins is required for today, then you are a "dispensationalist of sorts". If you do not believe that circumcision is required today, then you are "dispensationalist of a sort." If you do not keep all the Sabbath Day (Saturday) Laws, as required under the Law, then you are a "dispensationalist of a sort."

I never claimed to not be a Dispensationalist.  I claimed the viewpoint of Hyper-Dispensationalism to be incorrect.  The points, all points of the Law were pictures of what Jesus would one day complete.  The salvific grace was found in believing God concerning them, not in the practice of them.  

Quote
As a "dispensationalist", I believe that the attributes of God never change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. However, I also believe that the manner in which God has dealt with mankind through the ages. I can't find where Adam and Eve were ever required to offer up animals for salvation/justification. God gave them a consience to live by to help them to now determine what was right or wrong.

Able was not saved/justified by building an Ark. He was saved/justified in bringing the offering that God required.

Noah was not saved/justified by counting the star in heaven. He and his faimily were saved by building an ark as God required.

Abram was not saved/justified offering Isaac as a sacrifice. He was saved/justified by just believing God when God told him to look up and count the stars in the heaven.

Abraham was not saved/juistified by keeping the CIVIL, MORAL and CEREMONIAL LAWS of Moses. He was saved/justified by offering his son Issac on an altar.

Wrong.  Abel, Noah, Abram, and every other individual in the history of earth were not saved by adhering to a commandment of God's.  If so, then we work our way into God's grace.  What kind of grace is that?  Certainly not the grace given us in the pages of God's word.  

Abel was saved, not by bringing the right sacrifice, but by the heart which brought it.  A heart that believed God.  

Noah was saved, not by building the ark God commanded him to build (physically saved from drowning, yes, spiritually no), but by believing God.  His actions proved his belief.  His actions didn't save him.  God did.

Abraham was saved, not by offering Isaac up, but because he BELIEVED GOD when He said Abraham would have a son through Sarah his wife.  And through each individual, another part of God's redemptive plan was seen.  Not changed.  Revealed.  

Quote
After the children of Israel were given the CIVIL, MORAL and CEREMONIAL LAWS of Moses, they were not saved/justified by putting their faith and trust in the Cross work (death, burial resurrection) of Christ, as members of "the Body of Christ", the Church do today.

They were saved by putting their faith in the coming Redeemer - The Law bared testimony throughout of Him.  Believers today are saved by putting their faith in The Redeemer come, His death, burial and resurrection.  Same plan.  Same God.  Same grace.  Levels of that revealed grace called Dispensations.

Quote
So, from the above, you should be able to see that God has dealt differently with mankind throughout human history, AND His attributes never changed. Also, it shows "progressive revelation" by God.

There are no set amount of dispensations that one can find in the Bible. Paul in Ephesians 2 mentions three (3) dispensations. In verses 11, 12 he mentions "TIMES PAST" when the Gentiles were uncircumcised and outside the commonwealth of of Israel.

In verses 14-18 he talks about the "BUT NOW" time when the "middle wall of partition" between the Jew and Gentile was broken down, and the formation of "the one new man", the Body of Christ.

In verse 7 he speaks of "THE AGES TO COME", which all look forward to.

MOST who study the Bible from a dispensational point of view agree pretty much that there are 7 MAJOR dispensations recorded in the Bible. The one big area of disagreement in the dispensational ranks is when did the "dispensation of grace" begin.

Yup.

Quote
The majority view amongst dispensationalis is the the Church, the Body of Christ, started at Pentecost in Acts 2.

Then there are the mid-Acts/Acts 9 dispies who believe that the dispensation of grace started after the stoning of Stephen and the raising up of the Apostle Paul. (That is my understaning from Scripture.)

Nope.  Personally, I believe Jesus started His church, but that's neither here nor there.  Grace started at the cross.   Smiley

Quote
If it is you wish not to study the Bible from a dispensational viewpoint, that is you previlage. However, I have a better understanding of the Bible when I study it in that manner.

Agreed.  Just make sure that the beliefs of those you have no problem being likened too are truly biblical.  The belief of various salvific plans is simply not.  The Dispensations teach us that my friend.  

Quote
I was taught that ALL the Bible was written TO ME. But I now believe that is ALL written FOR ME but not ALL TO ME. Therefore I study the entire Bible.

Chapter and verse?  Because it was Paul who wrote to Timothy "All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,"  and if I'm not mistaken...Timothy was a Greek.  

Quote
I have learned that from the "LAWS OF MOSES" to the setting aside of Israel, salvation/justification was by doing the deeds/works of the LAW by FAITH. Those Laws were given by God to Moses for the children of Israel as their instructions in righteousness.

Then you've never learned the "LAWS OF MOSES."  The faith worked the deeds.  The deeds had no salvific grace.  Works minded salvation...

Quote
From the setting aside of Israel and the ushering in of the dispensation of grace, our salvation/justification is by FAITH ONLY in the Cross work of Christ. Our salvation is a "free gift" of God to all those will put their FAITH and trust in His Cross works, no deed/works of the Law required. The instructions in righteousness for members of "the Body of Christ" were given by God to the Apostle Paul. Paul is the Apostle to "the Body of Christ;" just as Moses was God's spokesperson to the children of Isreal.

Amen, and then no.  No on the following only the Apostle Paul viewpoint.  Again, we split hairs.  I argue this because it is presented time and again, not to the edifying of the body, but to the arguement of a portion.  It is wrong.  I can live with others believing it, but when it is repeatedly posted for the sake of argumentation, I will argue it.

Logged



"that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death"
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | ChristiansUnite.com Site Map | Statement of Beliefs



Copyright © 1999-2016 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media