Have I gone MAD???

[Right Divider]

Of course you didn't answer my question. Do you deny that a dispensation covers a period of time?

All activity of any kind "covers a period of time".

Dispensations of God are not necessarily exclusive during any one period of time.

It's odd that you think that the TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of Israel were suddenly made "neither Jew nor Greek".

Do you think that the doctrine contained in the Hebrew epistles is for a future dispensation and not for the present one?

The book of HEBREWS clearly has doctrine DIRECTLY related to ISRAEL and THEIR earthly kingdom/land/history/etc

If your answer is "yes" then give me the evidence which you think proves you are right.

The evidence is self-evident throughout the book. It's completely and thoroughly HEBREW.

HEBREWS mentions "priest" or "priesthood" 37 times.... In Paul's thirteen epistles.... ZERO!

If you cannot tell that there is a difference.... that's on you.

 

[Right Divider]

Hebrews 1:1-2 Acts 17:30

Wordnik defines Dispensationalism: A doctrine prevalent in some forms of Protestant Christianity that divides history into distinct periods, each marked by a different dispensation or relationship between God and humanity.

Wordnik's definition is not correct.

I've seen it defined "God worked with different people, in different ways, at different times" thus I see how 'time' comes into play. Is there are reason/confusion over the definition that is fairly important?

All human activity occurs "during a period of time".

As was mentioned a dispensation is about how God deals with those under it.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

All activity of any kind "covers a period of time".

Yes, and that is exactly what I meant when I spoke of a dispensation taking place during a time period.

It's odd that you think that the TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of Israel were suddenly made "neither Jew nor Greek".

What is odd about that since the Gentiles in the Body of Christ will be judging Gentiles in the kingdom (1 Cor.6:2). Do you deny that after those in the Body are caught up to meet the Lord Jesus in the air that they will "forever" be with Him (1 Thess.4:17) and hence all members of the Body will be with Him when He returns to usher in His earthly kingdom?

Or are you going to deny what Paul said at 1 Thess.4:7?

The book of HEBREWS clearly has doctrine DIRECTLY related to ISRAEL and THEIR earthly kingdom/land/history/etc

I just cannot trick my mind into believing that the following words are speaking about the earthly kingdom:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).​

The evidence is self-evident throughout the book. It's completely and thoroughly HEBREW.

Are you so confused that you cannot tell the difference between " earthly" things and " heavenly" things?

HEBREWS mentions "priest" or "priesthood" 37 times.... In Paul's thirteen epistles.... ZERO!

If you cannot tell that there is a difference.... that's on you.

The author of Hebrews is telling them that the priesthood associated with Israel is over and therefore he tells them that there is a disannulling of the commandment because the law made nothing perfect:

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God" (Heb.7:18-19).​

 

[Right Divider]

Yes, and that is exactly what I meant when I spoke of a dispensation taking place during a time period.

So, in other words, it was a completely meaningless statement.

What is odd about that since the Gentiles in the Body of Christ will be judging Gentiles in the kingdom (1 Cor.6:2). Do you deny that after those in the Body are caught up to meet the Lord Jesus in the air that they will "forever" be with Him (1 Thess.4:17) and hence all members of the Body will be with Him when He returns to usher in His earthly kingdom?

Or are you going to deny what Paul said at 1 Thess.4:7?

Another case of blending and blurring.

I just cannot trick my mind into believing that the following words are speaking about the earthly kingdom:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).​

The "heavenly Jerusalem" comes to earth Jerry. Read Revelation 21

Heb 13:14 KJV For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.

Are you so confused that you cannot tell the difference between " earthly" things and " heavenly" things?

That's rich....

Are you not aware that the "kingdom of heaven" refers to a kingdom on the earth?

The author of Hebrews is telling them that the priesthood associated with Israel is over and therefore he tells them that there is a disannulling of the commandment because the law made nothing perfect:

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God" (Heb.7:18-19).​

:juggle:

 

[Lon]

Wordnik's definition is not correct.


All human activity occurs "during a period of time".

As was mentioned a dispensation is about how God deals with those under it.

That's it understood. As far as my class on this, it was like the way anybody would 'divvy' out something, like a 7 course meal, each being a 'dispensing' one after the other etc.

"Time" really wouldn't help discuss that but as I've said, sometimes I see it given like Wordnik gave it.

All activity of any kind "covers a period of time".

Dispensations of God are not necessarily exclusive during any one period of time.

It's odd that you think that the TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of Israel were suddenly made "neither Jew nor Greek".


The book of HEBREWS clearly has doctrine DIRECTLY related to ISRAEL and THEIR earthly kingdom/land/history/etc


The evidence is self-evident throughout the book. It's completely and thoroughly HEBREW.

HEBREWS mentions "priest" or "priesthood" 37 times.... In Paul's thirteen epistles.... ZERO!

If you cannot tell that there is a difference.... that's on you.

I'm not sure where it puts me, but I agree with all this. I cannot remember whether the 2nd Acts seminary I attended thought Hebrews was written to Christians or not but they did advocate that we read and understand another's (Jewish Christians) mail as to them before trying to apply anything.

Thanks for discussion RD, Idolater, and Jerry.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So, in other words, it was a completely meaningless statement.

You made a mistake when you accused me of saying that a dispensation is a period of time. So if your accusation has any merit then quote me saying that.

Another case of blending and blurring.


The "heavenly Jerusalem" comes to earth Jerry. Read Revelation 21

So are you saying that the heavenly Jerusalem had actually come to the earth when the book of Hebrews was written? Did those who received that book believe like you do, that the heavenly kingdom had actually come to the earth when they read that book? The author of the book of Hebrews wrote the following:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).​

That is exactly the same thing which Paul is referring to when he wrote the following:

"And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph.2:6).​

Besides that, in the future the nation of Israel will once more be under the law (Dan.9:27) so it becomes obvious that the doctrine contained in the book of Hebrews is not for a future time:

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God" (Heb.7:18-19).​

Of course you just IGNORED that passage because it directly contradicts your strange ideas that the doctrine found in the book of Hebrews is not for the time when it was received but instead for a time in the future. And you just IGNORED the following verse that demonstrates that after those in the Body of Christ are caught up to be with Him in the air they will be with Him forever:

"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:17).​

Do you deny that those in the Body of Christ will be with the Lord Jesus when He returns to the earth to establish His earthly kingdom?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I'm not sure where it puts me, but I agree with all this.

Lon, do you actually agree with RD when he wrote that "The book of HEBREWS clearly has doctrine DIRECTLY related to ISRAEL and THEIR earthly kingdom/land/history/etc"?

Do you really think that what the author of Hebrews wrote here is referring to Israel's earthly kingdom?:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).​

 

[Right Divider]

That's it understood. As far as my class on this, it was like the way anybody would 'divvy' out something, like a 7 course meal, each being a 'dispensing' one after the other etc.

That's not exactly how God's dispensation work. The can run simultaneously. There is nothing requiring them to be sequential.

 

[Right Divider]

You made a mistake when you accused me of saying that a dispensation is a period of time. So if your accusation has any merit then quote me saying that.

Saying that "a dispensation takes place in a period of time" is meaningless.

So are you saying that the heavenly Jerusalem had actually come to the earth when the book of Hebrews was written?

Lying about what your opponent says is very bad form Jerry.

They were looking forward to the heavenly Jerusalem ON EARTH.

Did those who received that book believe like you do, that the heavenly kingdom had actually come to the earth when they read that book?

See how LYING leads you to say dumb things?

The author of the book of Hebrews wrote the following:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).​

Read more Hebrews.... like chapter 13.

Heb 13:14 KJV For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come.

They were kicked out of Jerusalem and were seeking the NEW/Heavenly one.

That is exactly the same thing which Paul is referring to when he wrote the following:

"And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph.2:6).​

False "association" Jerry. Just scripture twisting to fit your story.

Besides that, in the future the nation of Israel will once more be under the law (Dan.9:27) so it becomes obvious that the doctrine contained in the book of Hebrews is not for a future time:

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God" (Heb.7:18-19).​

The book TO THE HEBREWS applied to THEM then and in the future. Is that hard to understand?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Saying that "a dispensation takes place in a period of time" is meaningless.

In case you forgot you said the following:

Again you confuse a dispensation with a period of time.

I challenge you to quote anything I said where I confuse a dispensation with a period of time.

Lying about what your opponent says is very bad form Jerry.

I said nothing that isn't true. Again,I challenge you to quote anything I said that was a lie.

They were looking forward to the heavenly Jerusalem ON EARTH.

Why do you continue to pervert the Scriptures, Right Divider? Anyone who is spiritually enlightened can understand that these believers had already " come unto the heavenly Jerusalem:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).

According to you they were "looking forward to the heavenly Jerusalem ON EARTH." But the author of the book of Hebrews wrote that they "are come unto the heavenly Jerusalem."

Who am I supposed to believe? You, or the author of Hebrews? I believe the author and not you.

See how LYING leads you to say dumb things?

You are the one who is saying dumb things, not me.

The book TO THE HEBREWS applied to THEM then and in the future. Is that hard to understand?

You want it both ways but that idea makes no sense. In the future the Jews will once again be under the law so how can the following apply to them:

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God" (Heb.7:18-19).​

Why do you continue to IGNORE the following verse that demonstrates that after those in the Body of Christ are caught up to be with Him in the air they will be with Him forever:

"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:17).​

Do you deny that those in the Body of Christ will be with the Lord Jesus when He returns to the earth to establish His earthly kingdom?

 

[Lon]

Lon, do you actually agree with RD when he wrote that "The book of HEBREWS clearly has doctrine DIRECTLY related to ISRAEL and THEIR earthly kingdom/land/history/etc"?

I'm not sure about the 'earthly kingdom' but certainly 'history' where the book of Hebrews is addressing an expiring dilemma: taking two God-given directives and showing one is no longer essential nor appropriate (sacrificing at temple for sins).

Do you really think that what the author of Hebrews wrote here is referring to Israel's earthly kingdom?:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).​

This one, I'm listening, rather than weighing in. I really want to know what the Mid Acts position is. My eschatology may not fit well with either of your positions and as I'm looking to find out how closely are not, I am in agreement with at least one of your renditions of Mid Acts, I'm wanting to hear rather than weigh in too much. At this point, much of what RD is saying about Hebrews, from my own reading and understanding, I have to agree with, but for the above caveat, how it relates to eschatology. Because you two disagree, it is for me, a good sign that on one side or the other, I may come to appreciate Mid Acts discussions. Somehow I'm 'well within' Mid Acts theology discussions. I'm trying to find out how much and where. Thanks and appreciate the continued discussion both with me and others on this thread. in Him, -Lon

 

[Lon]

That's not exactly how God's dispensation work. The can run simultaneously. There is nothing requiring them to be sequential.

Agree, and I'd reckon, by the example, that a 7 course meal doesn't have to come in any particular sequence though I can see it doesn't do much but maybe convey first general ideas of "How God works differently."

One key of "Dispensational" discussion is a solid definition. Dispensationalism is "God worked differently, with different people, at different times." I'd acquiesce that 'different times' isn't really essential BUT 2nd Acts are closer to the O.T. so it makes sense, I think, for them to have that as part of their working definiition. Inasmuch as Jerry is closer to 2nd Acts, it makes sense in thread that there would be some similar corroboration. It all helps discussion. It is similar in Calvinism, there are at least 3 positions (similar to dispensational: 1) 2nd Acts 2) Mid 3) End

This also helps, when I'm trying to understand the differences. -Lon

 

[Right Divider]

Do you deny that those in the Body of Christ will be with the Lord Jesus when He returns to the earth to establish His earthly kingdom?

I deny that the body of Christ has the same calling as those in the kingdom calling of Israel.

I believe that the whole company of Jewish believers were baptized into the Body of Christ at Acts 7 when Stephen was stoned and that was the same time when Israel was temporarily set aside.

So you don't believe that the body of Christ began with Paul?

Do you believe that the twelve are no longer going to sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel?

 

[Right Divider]

Why do you continue to pervert the Scriptures, Right Divider? Anyone who is spiritually enlightened can understand that these believers had already " come unto the heavenly Jerusalem:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).

According to you they were "looking forward to the heavenly Jerusalem ON EARTH." But the author of the book of Hebrews wrote that they "are come unto the heavenly Jerusalem."

Who am I supposed to believe? You, or the author of Hebrews? I believe the author and not you.

You don't seem to understand the analogy being made in that passage:

Heb 12:18-24 KJV For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest, (19) And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more: (20) (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart: (21) And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake (22) But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, (23) To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, (24) And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

The author is contrasting the old with the new... not that the new Jerusalem has already arrived.

Much of the book of Hebrews is this old/new contrast.... not that the new had actually arrived.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I deny that the body of Christ has the same calling as those in the kingdom calling of Israel.

Since your ideas are contradicted by the Scriptures you refuse to answer what Paul said here:

"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (1 Thess.4:17).​

After those in the Body of Christ are caught up to meet the Lord Jesus in the air they will be with the Lord forever. So that means that those in the Body of Christ will return with Him when He returns to set up His earthly kingdom. Will you believe the Scriptures and admit that those in the Body will be with the Lord Jesus when He reigns on the earth?

Show me that you actually believe what Paul said at 1 Thess.4:17.

So you don't believe that the body of Christ began with Paul?

Here is what Paul said about that:

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me" (Ro.16:7).​

The phrase " in Christ" refers to being in the Body of Christ:

"So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Ro.12:5).​

Do you believe that the twelve are no longer going to sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel?

Since they are in the Body then they will be with the Lord Jesus when He returns to the earth to rule in His earthly kingdom and the Twelve will judge the Twelve Tribes and the Gentile believers in the Body will judge the rest of the world:

"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?" (1 Cor.6:2).​

The author is contrasting the old with the new... not that the new Jerusalem has already arrived.

Then why does he tell these Jewish believers that "ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem" ?

Those who actually believe the Bible know that this is the same thing which Paul write in the following passages:

"And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph.2:6).

"If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God" (Col.3:1).
​

 

[Lon]

I deny that the body of Christ has the same calling as those in the kingdom calling of Israel.

Admittedly, this never made sense to me even when getting it from 2nd Acts Dispensationalists.

"Why would God have a separate plan for one group?" It makes more sense in light of dispensations, because it goes back to different people with different plans, BUT I'd always seen 'salvation' as the greatest need of any man upon this earth, so much so, that anything else, even land, compared to it, seemed trivial. In a sense, a promise is a promise is a promise, but I'd always seen 'land' as conditional, and the terms never fulfilled. It made 'in Christ' the answer to every need, Jew or Greek, Slave or free, male or female.

At this point, I'm not sure I am Mid Acts, specifically because I'm unsure of future plans for Israel, though I'm not opposed, just not seeing the need from scripture for it to happen and how much I see as already fulfilled.

So you don't believe that the body of Christ began with Paul?

Do you believe that the twelve are no longer going to sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel?

Is it possible for Mid Acts to say "no"? Can that have changed after 'there is no longer Jew or Greek'? Can a Mid Acts believer see the whole track with Israel as no longer offered or is this strictly replacement theology (no Mid Acts Replacement Theology proponents)?

 

[Right Divider]

Is it possible for Mid Acts to say "no"?

That's why I ask Jerry this question. He thinks that the believers in Jerusalem, including the twelve apostles, were put into the body of Christ in Acts 7.

Most of us MAD believe that Paul was the first member of the body of Christ.

Can that have changed after 'there is no longer Jew or Greek'? Can a Mid Acts believer see the whole track with Israel as no longer offered or is this strictly replacement theology (no Mid Acts Replacement Theology proponents)?

The bottom line is that God chose the Jews to bring salvation to the Gentiles. Gentiles were always welcome to join with the Jews.
In the body of Christ, salvation is for everyone apart from being a Jew or a Gentile.

In common, salvation is through Christ... but not in an identical manner or outcome.

The Jews were promised an earthly kingdom and a land where they were above the gentiles and the gentiles receive blessing through Israel by blessing Israel.

In the present dispensation, all receive blessing regardless of Jew or gentile or Israel.

Salvation has many meanings in the Bible, we have to be careful.

 

[Right Divider]

Since they are in the Body then they will be with the Lord Jesus when He returns to the earth to rule in His earthly kingdom and the Twelve will judge the Twelve Tribes and the Gentile believers in the Body will judge the rest of the world:

Begging the question Jerry.

They are NOT in the body.

Why will the twelve only judge Israel... while the "body of Christ" judges the whole "world"?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Begging the question Jerry.

They are NOT in the body.

In the introduction found in the first epistle to the church at Corinth we read the following:

"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 their's and our's" (1 Cor.1:2).

Paul's words in this epistle were not just addressed to the church at Corinth but also to "all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord." That can only mean that Paul addressed this epistle to every Christian, whether they be Gentile or Jew, who were alive when he wrote this epistle. It is obvious that the Twelve are members of the Body of Christ because this is what Paul told all believers later in the same epistle:

"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

Paul tells all the believers on the face of the earth at that time that we are "all" baptized into the Body of Christ. That can only mean that the Twelve were in the Body of Christ and many of the Hebrew epistles were written by Peter and by John.

Most of us MAD believe that Paul was the first member of the body of Christ.

Then most of today's MADs are ignorant of what Paul said here:

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me" (Ro.16:7).​

The phrase " in Christ" refers to being in the Body of Christ:

"So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Ro.12:5).​

Once again you just IGNORE the evidence that contradict your ideas.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

It makes more sense in light of dispensations, because it goes back to different people with different plans, BUT I'd always seen 'salvation' as the greatest need of any man upon this earth, so much so, that anything else, even land, compared to it, seemed trivial.

Speaking of salvation, do you agree that down through history all people who have been saved were saved by faith alone apart from works?

There are many in the Mid Acts camp who insist that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works, despite the following words of the Savior spoken to the Jews who lived under the law:

"Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life" (Jn.6:47).​

What do you think?