I fail to see anything by Paul that even hints of David's kingdom.
BTW, the kingdom of God is within you...according to Jesus. (Luke 17:20-21)
The word "kingdom" has more than one application.
May I ask...
- Thread starter Hoping
- Start date
BTW, the kingdom of God is within you...according to Jesus. (Luke 17:20-21)
The word "kingdom" has more than one application.
Hoping:
The draw for me came along with studying the Word using a literal interpretation and consciously trying to not impose meaning on the text. Also, constant cross-referencing and word studies from the Greek and Hebrew led me to logically arrive at a basic dispensational perspective. Then when I realized that Paul's apostleship was unique and different from that of the twelve, it all began to fall into place. Recognizing distinctions in the text rather than blending it all together was a big help.
'Repentance' has become a repeated Christian cliche.
The word in greek is 'metaneo or metanoia' which means to change your mind.
'meta- after and noos-mind' means 'after mind'. Your mind is one way and then suddenly your mind is another way. Most people today believe repent means to change direction. It doesn't.
'Convert- epistrepho' means to change direction.
Jews had to change their mind about the identity of Jesus of Nazareth and be water baptized to be saved under the Kingdom dispensation.
Gentiles had to change their mind about creation and the existence of the true GOD, the GOD of Israel, then trust in the Lord Jesus' work on the cross and His resurrection the third day in order to be saved.
Hoping:
Water baptism was a Jewish symbolic ceremonial rite of purification.
I received, and was sealed unto the future day of the resurrection of my physical body when I trusted in Christ's finished work on the cross and was spiritually baptized by the Spirit into Christ.
'Enduring faithfully to the end'of the tribulation is a warning given to Israel by the Lord Jesus in Mt 10 and 24.
Supra
The draw for me came along with studying the Word using a literal interpretation and consciously trying to not impose meaning on the text. Also, constant cross-referencing and word studies from the Greek and Hebrew led me to logically arrive at a basic dispensational perspective. Then when I realized that Paul's apostleship was unique and different from that of the twelve, it all began to fall into place. Recognizing distinctions in the text rather than blending it all together was a big help.
'Repentance' has become a repeated Christian cliche.
The word in greek is 'metaneo or metanoia' which means to change your mind.
'meta- after and noos-mind' means 'after mind'. Your mind is one way and then suddenly your mind is another way. Most people today believe repent means to change direction. It doesn't.
'Convert- epistrepho' means to change direction.
Jews had to change their mind about the identity of Jesus of Nazareth and be water baptized to be saved under the Kingdom dispensation.
Gentiles had to change their mind about creation and the existence of the true GOD, the GOD of Israel, then trust in the Lord Jesus' work on the cross and His resurrection the third day in order to be saved.
Hoping:
Past sins? What about present sins and future sins?
Water baptism was a Jewish symbolic ceremonial rite of purification.
I received, and was sealed unto the future day of the resurrection of my physical body when I trusted in Christ's finished work on the cross and was spiritually baptized by the Spirit into Christ.
'Enduring faithfully to the end'of the tribulation is a warning given to Israel by the Lord Jesus in Mt 10 and 24.
Nothing
Supra
Requires knowledge of terminology and cross-referencing.
Hoping:
The Lord Jesus was speaking to the unbelieving corrupt Scribes and Pharisees.
Do you really believe that He was telling them that the Kingdom of GOD was in them?
The King was there... in their midst and they couldn't see it.
Hint:
The phrase 'the times and seasons' is used twice in the NT writings and both places are referring to the same thing.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
This part: "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." Right? You have yourself a contradiction between John and Jesus, one saying we all sin, and the Other saying if you sin the truth is not in you. And Dispensationalism doesn't resolve that contradiction. So you still have it, how do you resolve it? Your solution is to say that you don't sin, but that conflicts with John. But if you do sin, then it conflicts with Jesus. You have decided to conflict with John, which appears to be a conservative, safe choice, but the better choice is to find out how they are not contradicting.
Last edited:
Contradictory statements in scripture don't bother me because they are ancient statements at a time when vocabulary was much more limited than in modern times.
Words were more flexible and less precise.
So you have to take the statements made in light of the ancient limited vocabulary.
We see the flexibility with ancient statements in such cases as "all" isn't always precisely all, forever isn't always precisely forever, 1000 isn't always precisely 1000, etc.
So the draw for you was..."Recognizing distinctions in the text rather than blending it all together".
In other words, seeing a division between what is written of the original 12 apostles and Paul.
That doesn't make my heart flutter.
Why did it appeal to you to see division instead of unity?
Funny way of referring to one of the basic tenets of conversion.
If you "change your mind" about driving west, do you continue to drive west?
No.
That is fine, but what the Jews had to "change their minds" about was sin.
They and the Gentiles both also received the gift of "repentance unto life". (Acts 11:18)
If one, as you opine, "changes their mind" about Jesus being the Son of God, (and turns from sin), there will be no more sins.
How can someone recognize that there is an almighty God out there but continue to defy Him?
That does not sound like a real "change from" anything.
It is continuation of a despicable life still walked in the "flesh".
You have seemed to discount the effects of rebirth in your "draw".
But with the dismissal of water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, rebirth won't happen anyway.
Please show me scripture from the OT where anyone was water baptized; (especially in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins).
The word baptize/baptism isn't even used once in the OT.
So the Holy Spirit is living in a polluted temple?
Why isn't it a part of MADists doctrine then?
If one wants to see something bad enough, they will see it as they wish.
Yes He was.
From context, it seems more like He was rebuffing their desire to see what kingdom was more important.
The Jews only wanted a physical kingdom...and probably freedom from the Romans.
Jesus knew that the greatest enemy to be freed from was sin.
He has made that freedom available to all men on earth.
Thanks be to God !
Mid-Acts-dispensationalism does not seem to pursue that freedom.
The kingdom is in the heart of every convert to what is now called Christianity.
If they have "turned from" sin, and been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins.
No man can serve sin and God.
Th apostles in Acts 1:7 were still inquiring about a physical kingdom.
Paul refers to the end of time and the Lord Jesus' return in 1 Thes 5:1.
I don't see any similarities.
It's not "division instead of unity."
It's "rightly dividing the word of truth."
We rightly divide. You mash everything together.
No. What Steko said is correct. Had they changed their minds about Jesus being the promised Messiah, they wouldn't have rejected Him as their Messiah.
That's ironic, coming from you.
False.
The Kingdom of Israel has nothing to do with Christianity.
Right, and appropriate to those who also cannot say they have fellowship with God.
Why?
Because they walk in the darkness !
Darkness is sin. (Pro 4:19)
Not at all, as it is those who walk in sin that cannot say they have no sin.
Look at 1 John 1:7, which says that ALL our sins can be washed away by the blood of Christ.
Your POV denies verse 7...and 9, which says ALL our unrighteousness CAN be cleansed.
John uses a system of writhing in 1 John 1 which juxtaposes differing walks against each other.
Verses 5, 7, and 9 speak of those who walk in the light...which is God.
Verses 6, 8, and 10 speak of those who walk in sin-darkness.
(Paul uses the same system in Rom 8, where he juxtaposes walking in the Spirit against walking in the "flesh".)
There is no contradiction.
Where did Jesus say "we all sin"?
Though, except for Himself, it was surely true in His time, now we don't have to sin anymore, since His resurrection, and the introduction of rebirth from Gods seed.
God's seed cannot bring forth liars, adulterers, thieves, or murderers.
We can tell the tree by its fruit...remember?
Now, in the NT, not all men are sinners.
Some have "turned from" sin.
Only if one cannot differentiate between those walking in the light-God and those walking in darkness-sin.
No contradiction to me, as I can differentiate between those walking in God and those walking in sin.
There is no sin in God, (v5), so those walking in God cannot have sin on them either.
Yeah... after being taught about it for 40 days.
First of all... there is no end of time.
The LORD Jesus will return during the Day of the LORD and reign over a restored Israel and to the uttermost parts of the earth from His glorious throne...the throne promised Him...the throne of David....earthly Jerusalem
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Mat 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
Seeing unity in scriptures is the opposite of division.
Though that is true, don't you think that with the realization that their promised Messaih was amongst them would have resulted in a mind also changed regarding sin?
What I "wished to see" was freedom from a dozen addictions.
And hopelessness.
I didn't write "the kingdom of Israel".
The kingdom of God is that wherein God rules.
If we are obedient to Him, He rules in us.
Do you have any documentation of that?
I guess we'll see.
The last day on this earth will be the last day of this earth.
It can easily be said that those days have already commenced.
We just await its physical manifestation.
It is already happening in the hearts of the reborn.
He rules !
Hurry back Lord Jesus ! (Rev 22:20)
Act 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
You won't see if there is no time.
And that's a thousand plus years away, and....there will still be time.
Documentation?
You've just mashed it all together again.
Indeed!
Yes LORD, but long before then... as you promised to and thru your Apostle Paul.
Derf
Well-known member
Hi steko. I missed your post--a good one--for awhile, because it wasn't directly quoting a post of mine or tagging me ("@" followed by my username). If you'll do either in the future, I get notified.
No one is saved by works.
Hebrews 10:1 KJV — For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 Corinthians 9:8 KJV — And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:
1 Peter 1:1 KJV — Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
Find a map that shows where Galatia is and what other provinces are in and around Galatia.
There is much for you and me to learn from reading the letters Jesus dictated for those mostly gentile churches. He even promises a blessing for reading them and keeping them.
Revelation 1:3 KJV — Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
It seems a shame not to accept a blessing from our Lord by disregarding His words, don't you think?
I'm ok with most all of that, except that the "gospel of the earthly kingdom" is intimately related to the gospel of grace. No one is/was saved by the gospel of the earthly kingdom! No one! And no one will be. We are all saved by grace. If the gospel of the earthly kingdom requires works of the mosaic law for salvation, then it is anathema to the true gospel, according to Paul.
No one is saved by works.
If we're talking about salvation, Paul's gospel is the only one that has ever been valid. The old covenant was not sufficient to save, as we learn in Hebrews:
Hebrews 10:1 KJV — For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Just as Paul said to gentiles, that we are made for good works...an expression of our faith.
2 Corinthians 9:8 KJV — And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:
No, that's not true. What accompanies our faith is good works. Ask @JudgeRightly
I don't even think it's our belief that saves us, any more than it was the faith of those Jesus healed that healed them. Jesus healed them. It was His power at work. But their faith allowed the healing to take place. Our faith, as you describe, allows Christ's sacrifice to be applied to us.
And it will still be that the people that are saved will be saved by grace...not by works of the law. That's not a different gospel.
Out of line with the command to go into all the world and preach the gospel? I don't see how.
Yes they were. God had to allow them to be persecuted to even get them to leave Jerusalem.
That's not competition...that's ANATHEMA.
And he even had to rebuke Peter for falling into the same trap. That's not what you do for a friendly competition. That's what you do to save people from being accursed.
Agree
Disagree. They will still be saved by the grace of God, not by works of righteousness.
That's a bold statement. You are certain that none of them ever made any mistakes??
I'm glad you agree that Peter was in the wrong for returning to the law as his source of salvation.
I'll have to go review it. Don't have time right now.
Peter tells us--it was the churches of Galatia.
1 Peter 1:1 KJV — Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
Find a map that shows where Galatia is and what other provinces are in and around Galatia.
I agree with this, though I'm not unwilling to hear other possibilities. It runs counter to MAD doctrine.
Revelation includes 7 letters written to churches that were full of gentiles. They were full of gentiles when Paul wrote to and/or visited them, and they were still full of gentiles when Rev was written and received by all of those churches.
There is much for you and me to learn from reading the letters Jesus dictated for those mostly gentile churches. He even promises a blessing for reading them and keeping them.
Revelation 1:3 KJV — Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
It seems a shame not to accept a blessing from our Lord by disregarding His words, don't you think?
Last edited:
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Nowhere in the OT is anybody explicitly baptized in the name of Christ, but confer:
Exodus 40:12 Leviticus 8:6 People are baptized
Psalm 51:2 51:7 David requests to be baptized
Ezekiel 16:9 God baptized Jerusalem
Along with dozens of instances of people baptizing themselves.
If you have a reason to call the priest's washing a baptism...feel free.
But I see no indication of "immersion" in Ex 40 or Lev 8.
No, he asks God to wash him, but as God doesn't baptize, your point is misdirected.
I see no "immersion".
But if you see a presage of water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, why are you against water baptism? (or are you?)
Taking a bath isn't a baptism.
As John the baptist knew what a baptism was, why is there no prior mention of the word "baptize" before Matt 3?
Especially for the remission of sins?
Derf
Well-known member
The Bapto Word-family in the Septuagint
A sincere Bible student feels that the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, provides evidence that the Greek term bapto may signify the actions of either sprinkling or pouring, as a baptismal rite. What does the evidence actually reveal?
christiancourier.com
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
So your definition of baptism would be immersion, but basically a ceremonial washing, yes? But being immersive is required for you to call it baptism, is this correct? And you and I both know that you're promoting a partisan position in saying that, favoring the Baptists over almost everybody else. If I'm correct.
But you do believe baptism is a ceremonial washing, correct?
But you see a ceremonial washing, yes?
You're the one saying it's got to be immersive to be a baptism. Do you believe it is a ceremonial washing or not?
Apparently it's because baptism means immersion "in the Greek."
(According to Derf's link.)
But certainly when people are instructed to wash themselves in the sea, we're talking about immersion, right? I can't imagine you go to the sea to ceremonially wash your flesh, and you're merely up to your ankles washing your feet.
I don't think John the Baptist just washed people's feet in the Jordan.
There are a lot of examples of people washing their feet in the OT too, just so you know, so the practice was distinct and distinguished from all the other ceremonial washings
(sometimes washing your feet was just hygiene, but sometimes is was ceremonial, priestly)
.