May I ask...

[steko]

"They" being MADs, perhaps, but not all dispensationalists. MADs are a subset of all dispensationalists.

We would say that only MAD is true Biblical dispensationalism.
Basic OT/NT division dispensationalists don't get it at all.
Acts 2 dispensationalists don't go far enough.
Acts 28 dispensationalists go too far.

 

[Derf]

We would say that only MAD is true Biblical dispensationalism.

Of course you would.

Basic OT/NT division dispensationalists don't get it at all.
Acts 2 dispensationalists don't go far enough.
Acts 28 dispensationalists go too far.

But the fact that they are "Acts x" means they are taking it from the bible (rightly or wrongly), and that you call them dispensationalists shows that you support what I wrote.

 

[Hoping]

Each other.

You kind of lost me there.
Who exactly are you referring to?
I went back and can see the "each other" refers to the correct and incorrect narratives.
Thank you for your patience.

Yeah. You can open the book and read it for yourself.

Even the bible itself tells us how to identify the truth.

 

[Hoping]

When did you actually read the whole Bible though, Hope? Was it while you were Catholic, or "after?"

After.
I had read parts of it in prior years, but with the catholic tendencies.

We don't worship the Mother; we love the Mother.

I love what she did, but right now she is just another dead lady.
I guess we can love the dead though.

Agreed. Assumptions, presuppositions, tomato-tomahto. You really can only hold assumptions which are proven to be true, otherwise they are just assumptions and opinions, not facts. And they're certainly not self-evident, you have to prove them (show them, demonstrate them). Only the most basic things can be assumed without evidence proving them to be true. Elementary things, things that make up the universe and our thoughts.

I guess one could hold assumptions, and the assumptions of others, as true until one finds out a real truth to counter it.
Thanks be to God for supplying the truth to those who seek it.

What if they get it from their hopes, Hope? Is that still a wide road? or is it in your view necessarily the right road?

If they get their understandings from their own hopes, isn't it still one of those assumptions?

There's one true, correct narrative, it's the Apostolic narrative, the one narrative which all the Apostles preached, while they were here on Earth amongst us. It's why we're all one faith (Ephesians 4:5). That's a really narrow road, contrasted with what you said above, "Where the reader gets his understanding of Scripture is a wide road."

Truthfully, I must include the prophets of the OT in the narrative.
They laid the ground-work of what Jesus fulfilled.
My "wide road" comment was in regard to all the differing perspectives of Christianity.
Men have gotten their perspectives from every level of false prophets and charlatans for centuries.
Fortunately some real prophets and teachers are still here to teach.

There's one road which is Apostolic, it's got one lane, it's not a 10-lane divided highway, it's just one lane.
People really don't like this concept.

Agreed.
They want what makes them comfortable.

But facts are facts. When the Apostles had been 'at it' for many years (iow well after James son of Zebedee had been executed), they were all teaching and preaching and spreading the message as a team, they all agreed with each other, we have proof of the few times there were disputes, but all the rest of the time there isn't any corroboration about constant bickering and fighting. They were all in lockstep.
Whatever that lockstep is, is the actual, one Christian faith. Right? that's just a fact.

Fact indeed !
Look for the "fruit", in order to find the real prophets.

 

[JudgeRightly]

You kind of lost me there.
Who exactly are you referring to?

Maybe you need to just go back and read what was said again.

 

[Hoping]

@Hoping
Right? You agree with this, right Hope?
I'm assuming you agree with this, but I realized, I don't have any proof. I'm asking you for proof. Will you give me the proof I need, in order to establish this assumption of mine?

How can I prove I am in "lock-step" with the apostles when you don't even believe I live without sin?

And assuming you will provide this to me, I'm going to continue my thought. Because there's just one Apostolic narrative, therefore the New Testament is in agreement with that one narrative. The New Testament corroborates that one narrative. It might not clearly specify it, spell it out, or set it out, not in every case, in fine detail. But it agrees with it, it doesn't conflict with it, so any narrative which conflicts with the Scripture is of course, cannot be, impossible, that it's the Apostolic narrative, which is the only narrative which is the actual, true, historic Christian faith.
This assumes you agree with the above. (No Dispensationalist agrees with the above, so I'm not talking to them, I'm talking to you, Hoping.)

If we can find love in any particular doctrine, it is of God.
There may indeed be one correct narrative, but there are hundreds of other incorrect narratives.
Sorting them out takes the gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

[Hoping]

Maybe you need to just go back and read what was said again.

Did and done..."the correct and incorrect narratives".

 

[Stripe]

You kind of lost me there.
Who exactly are you referring to?
I went back and can see the "each other" refers to the correct and incorrect narratives.
Thank you for your patience.

You're worried about corrupt narratives. They can be compared against each other according to their adherence to scripture.

Even the bible itself tells us how to identify the truth.

You can open it and read it.

 

[steko]

Am I already a mid-Acts-dispensationalist without even knowing it?

Nope

 

[Derf]

OK. No. 1 I have the least problems with. Lol.

That's good. What about the second?

2. That the Jews could achieve salvation by persevering, but others didn't have to.

If you agree with me that there isn't any other gospel, this follows--they can't be saved by persevering any more than we can, but that's what that other gospel says. Some of the back-and-forth here has been about James' "faith plus works" salvation vs. Paul's "faith alone" salvation. Those works, according MAD, had to continue until the end for the Jews in the kingdom to be saved. That's part of the description of the gospel of the kingdom.

What about the third:

3. That there was competition between the 12 apostles vs Paul--to get converts into the different church types.

This is more subtle, but if there are legitimate people coming from the Jerusalem church (James and the 12), and the believers in Galations could become proselytes legitimately, and be saved by the gospel of the kingdom, then Paul's rebuke was merely about which gospel was better, wasn't it? Then why would they be accursed?

4. That Peter was trying to follow the law sporadically because it helped save him, instead of only because it made him look good to the judaizers.

I've had this conversation about Peter with MADs, but they don't have much to say, except to repeat the erroneous claim that Peter just stopped following Jewish laws temporarily, and Paul admonished him for it, which is rubbish if you read the passage.

5. That John would spend so much time telling the people of God to love one another, but that didn't mean the kingdom Jews were supposed to love the church gentiles.

If the kingdom doesn't include gentiles, and James was writing to kingdom beluevers only, then they only had to love those brothers that were in the kingdom. They weren't supposed to associate with gentiles, etc.

6. That Paul and Peter wrote to the same people, which must have included both Jews and non-proselyte gentiles, but somehow the overarching message was different. (i guess this is the same complaint as the different gospels)

I really don't understand how Peter, writing to the same people in Galatia that Paul wrote to could say
2 Peter 3:15 KJV — And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
without propounding the same gospel to them. And if the same, why were those not foolish that were trusting in the kingdom gospel still?

 

[Hoping]

You're worried about corrupt narratives. They can be compared against each other according to their adherence to scripture.

Yes the narratives can be compared against each other..
But which narrative is the true one from which one bases their conclusion?
That is a rhetorical question, as I know which is correct.

You can open it and read it.

Amen to that, and we will find John 8:32-34 to help determine if what they consider the narrative is the true one.
It is written..."And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin."
The true narrative will free men from committing sin.

 

[steko]

Derf:

That Paul and other NT writers were not only targeting different people groups, but also were propagating different gospels, which Paul anathematized.

Immediately after Paul's conversion, he preached the gospel of the earthly Kingdom of David, which he was saved under. He later received further instruction from the ascended LORD concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ according to the mystery of the grace of GOD. Acts is a historical narrative of a gradual transition from the prophetic program for national Israel to the mystery program for the church the body of Christ.
The gospel of the earthly Davidic Kingdom according to prophecy was a valid gospel up until Acts 15/ Galatians 2. From that point on, Paul's gospel according to the mystery became the only valid gospel for both individual Jews and individual Gentiles. Paul became the Apostle to the nations. Once that generation ended and the temple was destroyed, the gospel of the earthly prophetic Kingdom was set aside until a later date.
Today and for most of two-thousand years Paul's gospel is the only valid gospel for both Jews and Gentiles.

Derf:

That the Jews could achieve salvation by persevering, but others didn't have to.

During Christ's earthly ministry to the circumcision/national Israel, Jews were required to have faith that Jesus of Nazareth was their promised Messiah plus they had to be ceremonially cleansed by water baptism for forgiveness of sins and to be eligible for a nation wide priesthood to be ministers to the nations/gentiles in the Davidic Kingdom. Until Paul's gospel of grace intervened, works were always required for the Jews as an expression of faith.
Today for both Jew and Gentile, what accompanies our faith is our confession that I'm trusting in Christ's finished work on the cross for the forgiveness of sins, plus nothing, and that He resurrected the third day for my justification/righteousness before GOD.

Through the four gospels and early Acts, Israel was to be facing fulfillment of prophecy which would soon bring on the 70th week of Daniel/the tribulation through which individual Jews would have to endure/persevere to survive and receive their returning Messiah in the Day of the LORD. Trumpets, Atonement, and then Tabernacles.
The gospel of the earthly Davidic kingdom will be proclaimed again during that time.

Derf:

That there was competition between the 12 apostles vs Paul--to get converts into the different church types.

Seems to me, both churches were simply preaching their gospels mostly to their corresponding recipients.
Peter was instructed to go to the gentile Cornelius' house with a special mission that was out of line with the so-called great commission to prepare the way for Paul's ministry to the nations.
After that event the Jewish believers were going to Jews only in spite of the fact that there had been Gentiles saved in Acts 10..
Competition seems to have significantly begun at Antioch Syria when Jewish Kingdom believers began insisting that believing Gentiles become proselytes of Israel.
The response to that event was the Jerusalem council of Acts 15/ Gal 2.
At some point around this time probably when Paul was in Ephesus, he wrote his letter to the Galatian believers who were being seduced into adding works to grace, particularly circumcision and the Mosaic law.
Paul continues to be opposed by the circumcision as expressed in several of his letters.
The gospel which he calls 'my gospel' he received directly by revelation from the ascended LORD Jesus and was to be the enduring gospel to both Jew and Gentile in this present age or dispensation.
Peter, James and John added nothing to his knowledge or practice but he informed them of that gospel which he preaches among the nations. Then they 'perceived' and understood his ministry and gave the right hand of fellowship to he and Barnabas. Paul's gospel is the only valid gospel today until the fullness of the Gentiles and then GOD resumes the prophetic program/ministry/dispensation and the preaching of the gospel of the Kingdom.

Derf:.

That Peter was trying to follow the law sporadically because it helped save him, instead of only because it made him look good to the judaizers.

In early Acts Peter and the eleven under the power of the Holy Spirit made no mistakes.
After the stoning of Stephen, the diminishing of the Kingdom program for Israel and the raising up of Paul for the mystery program, Peter displayed his natural weakness of fearing what others thought of him as at the crucifixion. Peter had already understood Paul's doctrine of grace and said as much in Acts 15:7-9.

Derf:

That John would spend so much time telling the people of God to love one another, but that didn't mean the kingdom Jews were supposed to love the church gentiles.

I don't understand that one.
Who are you referring to for saying that?

Derf:

That Paul and Peter wrote to the same people, which must have included both Jews and non-proselyte gentiles, but somehow the overarching message was different. (i guess this is the same complaint as the different gospels)

Paul wrote to mostly Gentiles.
Peter wrote to Jews dispersed in other countries as, did James.

Peter said that Paul wrote to at least one Jewish assembly, the same assembly that Peter was writing to in his second letter. This begs the question as to what Jewish assembly Paul wrote to and where is that letter?
When I became a Christian in 1979, I accepted that Paul wrote the letter to the Hebrews.
After some time, I grew to believe that Paul did not write Hebrews and defended my position staunchly.
Only recently have I changed my position again having run across several good arguments for Paul being the author but written down by another person. Paul had good reason for remaining anonymous because of the Jewish opposition.

Paul is my Apostle. He communicates to me the Church the Body of Christ doctrine and practice.
His epistles are written to me, about me and for me.
The four gospels, the Jewish epistles and the Revelation are to Jews, about Jews and for Jews.

 

[Hoping]

Nope

Even though I am following Paul's path after Christ Jesus?

 

[steko]

Even though I am following Paul's path after Christ Jesus?

If you were truly MAD, you would know it and also be able to explain it.

 

[Hoping]

Derf:

Immediately after Paul's conversion, he preached the gospel of the earthly Kingdom of David, which he was saved under. He later received further instruction from the ascended LORD concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ according to the mystery of the grace of GOD. Acts is a historical narrative of a gradual transition from the prophetic program for national Israel to the mystery program for the church the body of Christ.
The gospel of the earthly Davidic Kingdom according to prophecy was a valid gospel up until Acts 15/ Galatians 2. From that point on, Paul's gospel according to the mystery became the only valid gospel for both individual Jews and individual Gentiles. Paul became the Apostle to the nations. Once that generation ended and the temple was destroyed, the gospel of the earthly prophetic Kingdom was set aside until a later date.
Today and for most of two-thousand years Paul's gospel is the only valid gospel for both Jews and Gentiles.

Where does Paul talk about the "earthly kingdom of David" anywhere?
He mentions David a few times in historical reference, but not at all in relationship to conversion or salvation.

 

[Hoping]

If you were truly MAD, you would know it and also be able to explain it.

Know Paul's path, or know MAD's doctrine which they say follows Paul's path?

 

[Hoping]

As to my OP, I still have not garnered what is the big draw of Mid-Acts-Dispensationalism.
As I know it speaks of a difference between Jewish and Gentile believers, and what each is required to do in order to be saved, is the "draw" that MADs forgo repentance from sin? water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins? reception of the gift of the Holy Ghost? walking uprightly in the Spirit instead of in the flesh? or enduring faithfully until the end?

What is so wrong about turning from sin, getting one's past sins washed away by the blood of Christ at water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sin, receiving the Comforter, walking in the Spirit after the destruction of the flesh, or manifesting the grace of God for an entire life span?

 

[steko]

Where does Paul talk about the "earthly kingdom of David" anywhere?
He mentions David a few times in historical reference, but not at all in relationship to conversion or salvation.

1Th 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
1Th 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

 

[steko]

Know Paul's path, or know MAD's doctrine which they say follows Paul's path?

Understand Paul's revelation of the secret and adhere to it.

 

[Hoping]

Understand Paul's revelation of the secret and adhere to it.

Yes, Christ in you...the hope of glory.
Col 1:26-28..."Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:"