musterion
Well-known member
The real proof of dispensationalism is very, very simple:
NO ONE can obey every (or even most) commands of God and of Christ found in the Bible, but dispensationalism is the only system that honestly deals with WHY NOT.
Those who say "The whole book is for me," and want you to think that means they obey all of it, are lying. If they've read the Book, they know they don't obey nearly all of the Book. They can't. No one can.
There's two main reasons they can't:
1) Some commands of God and of Christ are impossible to obey today.
2) It's impossible to obey some commands without directly disobeying other commands. To claim it can be done creates contradictions in God's word which they can never reconcile.
Summary: The proof that dispensationalism is true is that it points out what no other system does: that no one can obey it all even when they claim it all. And mid-Acts dispensationalism is the most correct form because it's the most contextually precise.
NO ONE can obey every (or even most) commands of God and of Christ found in the Bible, but dispensationalism is the only system that honestly deals with WHY NOT.
Those who say "The whole book is for me," and want you to think that means they obey all of it, are lying. If they've read the Book, they know they don't obey nearly all of the Book. They can't. No one can.
There's two main reasons they can't:
1) Some commands of God and of Christ are impossible to obey today.
2) It's impossible to obey some commands without directly disobeying other commands. To claim it can be done creates contradictions in God's word which they can never reconcile.
Summary: The proof that dispensationalism is true is that it points out what no other system does: that no one can obey it all even when they claim it all. And mid-Acts dispensationalism is the most correct form because it's the most contextually precise.
