ECT What Is Dispensationalism; really?

Danoh

New member
At its' most basic level, Dispensationalism is simply Distinctions in Identities or Things That Differ.

In this, a much earlier form of these Distinctions in Identities can be found in God's Words to Israel through Moses as to the Distinction in Identities in every way, shape and form, between Israel and the Gentile Nations.

Deuteronomy 4:1 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the LORD God of your fathers giveth you. 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

4:5 Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the LORD my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it. 4:6 Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. 4:7 For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for? 4:8 And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day? 4:9 Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons' sons; 4:10 Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children.

Not surprisingly, the Apostle will assert something similar to the above many centuries later, not only as to the need to not depart from Paul's distinctive "my gospel" but to the need to be very diligent in attempting to seek to not deviate from the Lord's Words through him:


2 Timothy 2:1 Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. 2:3 Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.

2:7 Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things. 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: 2:9 Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound.

2:14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

Luke 12:42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season? 12:43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 12:44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
It doesnt' matter if you think there are 7P7P or 2P2P, you are still disunifying the Bible if you don't stick with the self-organizing passages on these questions. Have you seriously grasped what Gal 3:17 means yet? I don't think so.

2, if there is any redeeming feature to the Law, it is that it was tutorial for Christ. A child-trainer. This is not a 'distinction of identity.' This means a 'child' is supposed to grow into a 'man.' The earlier is unified with the later, not divergent.
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
It doesnt' matter if you think there are 7P7P or 2P2P, you are still disunifying the Bible if you don't stick with the self-organizing passages on these questions. Have you seriously grasped what Gal 3:17 means yet? I don't think so.

Did you build a 300 cubit long ark? Why or why not? Let me help. That instruction was not for you.
 

Danoh

New member
It doesnt' matter if you think there are 7P7P or 2P2P, you are still disunifying the Bible if you don't stick with the self-organizing passages on these questions. Have you seriously grasped what Gal 3:17 means yet? I don't think so.

2, if there is any redeeming feature to the Law, it is that it was tutorial for Christ. A child-trainer. This is not a 'distinction of identity.' This means a 'child' is supposed to grow into a 'man.' The earlier is unified with the later, not divergent.

I've yet to meet a person who OVER relies on "books about" who is actually able to get at the actually intended sense of another's words free of the crippling result of said OVER reliance.

And you are no exception to that.

By Distinctions In Identities, I was referring to all sorts of distinctions between things - not - simply just people :rotfl:

Your own Matt. 24A/Matt.24B is a distinction in identies as to time stamps - :doh:

Besides, I do not subscribe to this OVER "educated" in "books about" resulting notion of yours: 2P2P.

I subscribe to ONE Two-Fold Purpose, Eph. 1:20; Eph. 3:15.

Lol - you and yours; you go decade after decade talking against these issues clueless as to what they are.

Put the books down, Inter :)
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
:chuckle:

You are undermining His finished work (Hebrews shows the superiority of New/reality in Christ over Old/shadows and types) by suggesting there is a temporary 'Jewish/circ' gospel before Paul. Keeping the Law after the Lamb of God sheds His blood is nonsense and futile, even for Jewish Christians. The dividing wall is down because of the cross and there is nothing needed for Jew/Gentile to be one in Christ based on the one true NT gospel. Two gospel theories are not biblical post-cross. MAD confuses eschatological/covenantal issues and soteriological issues. If this sounds robotic, so be it. I will keep pounding away this basic truth till you guys wake up and smell the coffee. His death and resurrection negates any need for a circ gospel. Paul was a messenger of the gospel, not the first one to introduce a new gospel
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
You are undermining His finished work (Hebrews shows the superiority of New/reality in Christ over Old/shadows and types) by suggesting there is a temporary 'Jewish/circ' gospel before Paul. Keeping the Law after the Lamb of God sheds His blood is nonsense and futile, even for Jewish Christians. The dividing wall is down because of the cross and there is nothing needed for Jew/Gentile to be one in Christ based on the one true NT gospel. Two gospel theories are not biblical post-cross. MAD confuses eschatological/covenantal issues and soteriological issues. If this sounds robotic, so be it. I will keep pounding away this basic truth till you guys wake up and smell the coffee. His death and resurrection negates any need for a circ gospel. Paul was a messenger of the gospel, not the first one to introduce a new gospel

Who is your guru?
What is the topic?
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
You are undermining His finished work (Hebrews shows the superiority of New/reality in Christ over Old/shadows and types) by suggesting there is a temporary 'Jewish/circ' gospel before Paul. Keeping the Law after the Lamb of God sheds His blood is nonsense and futile, even for Jewish Christians. The dividing wall is down because of the cross and there is nothing needed for Jew/Gentile to be one in Christ based on the one true NT gospel. Two gospel theories are not biblical post-cross. MAD confuses eschatological/covenantal issues and soteriological issues. If this sounds robotic, so be it. I will keep pounding away this basic truth till you guys wake up and smell the coffee. His death and resurrection negates any need for a circ gospel. Paul was a messenger of the gospel, not the first one to introduce a new gospel

I once accepted uncritically traditional views, but have found them unbiblical or problematic, and based upon theological wooden literalism. Your exegesis is based on a few proof texts without more credible interpretations ,in context. And we cannot dialogue with ad hominem attacks and false accusationsis outside of biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity on the essentials, in light of church history. . I deny your flawed interpretation of the text, to support your cultural bias, as you are stereotyping out of ignorance. False accusations of heresy are not the same thing as proven heresy, which is a logical fallacy, divorced from reality,and superficial understandings, contextually, etc. You lack credibility to make simplistic judgments, as my objection is with ad hominem attacks that are unjust, not wooden liertalisms, isms, that throw the baby out with the bath water. One who clings to preconceived notions, logical, systematic, inconsistencies, presuppositions/assumptions, etc., such as yourself, and sloppy exegets a text, w/o the context, and proof texting, is not the ideal person to arbitrate doctrinal disputes. Your proof texts, using your interpretation, would lead to contradiction, so they must be interpreted somewhat figuratively in light of metaphors.

Are you an annihilationist? Atheist? Universalist? Do you like having your cake and eating it too? Do you have dementia , as you do not see your argument is invalid. Until you look at every use of the word in every context, you should not be dogmatic about simplistic conclusions. In your false humility, you also confuse the myriad subjective interpretations of Scripture (hence all the divisions in Christianity) with the objective truth of Scripture.your view is metaphysical and divorced from a reconciled, reciprocal relationship concept).God does not grade on a Bell Curve,(logical fallacy: argument of the beard....a beard is different than a whisker on an extreme continuum).Your view is metaphysical and divorced from a reconciled, reciprocal relationship concept.

etc.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Who is your guru?
What is the topic?

God could have prevented rebellion by creating robots, and cosmic candy vending machines.. What is your shoe size again?Why are you impersonating God? You are not Jehovah God, so quit blaspheming lest you get struck by lightning..Adding God and the Bible to your pet peeve doctrine, and hobby horse, lunatic, fringe views, does not validate nonsense.Mutually exclusive views are not equally valid, in context, etc .Are you a Jeffersonian closed Deist, or a Coolidge 7 point Calvinist? Did you fall out of your high chair, hit your head, resulting in dementia? May I recommend a traditional, normative orthrpraxic surgeon?
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Who is your guru?
What is the topic?

A.T. Robertson's Word Pictures commentary correctly deals with the Greek/interpretation in context...he is a Greek master, not a KJV only.

Physical, temporal issues are analagous, not identical, to spiritual issues. There is a cooperative element in reconciled, reciprocal love relationships (or universalism and OSAS would be true)
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
God could have prevented rebellion by creating robots, and cosmic candy vending machines.. What is your shoe size again?Why are you impersonating God? You are not Jehovah God, so quit blaspheming lest you get struck by lightning..Adding God and the Bible to your pet peeve doctrine, and hobby horse, lunatic, fringe views, does not validate nonsense.Mutually exclusive views are not equally valid, in context, etc .Are you a Jeffersonian closed Deist, or a Coolidge 7 point Calvinist? Did you fall out of your high chair, hit your head, resulting in dementia? May I recommend a traditional, normative orthrpraxic surgeon?

The ultimate cause and explanation for a free agent's behavior goes back to the agent, no further. (so God cannot be blamed for sin and evil and we are morally culpable vs deterministic views that impugn His holy character). Acts 2 is post-cross, post-finished work of Christ. Can you find any other source who has come up with this? Did you borrow it from someone? I have read Ironside's articles on the subject. Quote all of his early and late teaching instead of a few sentences out of context of all that he taught. He does not support MAD as you know.
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Put the books down, Inter :)

You underestimate the caliber of scholars that God has raised up to keep the sheep from falling for false teaching and ignorance on important subjects. Why should I trust you as an expert on things, and reject those with proven track records and godly character/insights? Eph. 4:11-13 vs internet wannabees with no training or accountability…Any credible biblical theology of John and Paul or any credible commentary or NT scholar or average believer has no problem with I Jn. vs Paul.There are many resources to help you, but you prefer fringe writers over ones that can give you more biblical answers….but I should ignore more credible sources and their documented evidence? Why, pray tell?! What school did you go to again?
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
You underestimate the caliber of scholars that God has raised up to keep the sheep from falling for false teaching and ignorance on important subjects. Why should I trust you as an expert on things, and reject those with proven track records and godly character/insights? Eph. 4:11-13 vs internet wannabees with no training or accountability…Any credible biblical theology of John and Paul or any credible commentary or NT scholar or average believer has no problem with I Jn. vs Paul.There are many resources to help you, but you prefer fringe writers over ones that can give you more biblical answers….but I should ignore more credible sources and their documented evidence? Why, pray tell?! What school did you go to again?

Equally capable godly scholars have agreed down through the years on these topics, yet you insist on being in the Lunatic Fringe with Red Rider.
 

genuineoriginal

New member
Did you build a 300 cubit long ark? Why or why not? Let me help. That instruction was not for you.

One of the Ten Commandments is "do not murder".
Was the commandment given to unsaved Gentiles?
If not, can an unsaved Gentile commit murder and not be condemned for it by God in the coming Judgment?
If so, what other commandments in the Torah are for more than just the children of Israel?
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
The ultimate cause and explanation for a free agent's behavior goes back to the agent, no further. (so God cannot be blamed for sin and evil and we are morally culpable vs deterministic views that impugn His holy character). Acts 2 is post-cross, post-finished work of Christ. Can you find any other source who has come up with this? Did you borrow it from someone? I have read Ironside's articles on the subject. Quote all of his early and late teaching instead of a few sentences out of context of all that he taught. He does not support MAD as you know.
Your argument is vapid and fails to read “Peter, Paul, and Mary” closely. Your unbalanced is a works based caste system in the early church for some vs. all, etc. The anti-intellectualism of your group also shows when you reject “The Modern English” evidence that contradicts your MAD proof texts. Context is also abused in your proof texting. Your arrogant personality is also grating.The key is proper exegesis in context, not importing MAD ideas into proof texts. The key is to translate/interpret/apply properly.

MAD is a fringe belief and should not claim exclusive Deuteronimical authenticity. The best NT scholars support core Pentyism thought as much or more than the cult of MAD. Your hang up with the pre-ark one church, or the Book of Jaspar, etc. does not negate our essential agreement on the essentials the traditional, orthodox church has historically supported, etc. If the rest of us were anti-Peter, Methusala , etc., or living like Jewish Benny Hinns converts with baggage, you would have a point. Since we do not, this is becoming pointless.


Have you ever read a Greek grammar (e.g. Mounce or Wallace) cover to cover, rookie?
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Equally capable godly scholars have agreed down through the years on these topics, yet you insist on being in the Lunatic Fringe with Red Rider.
Classic proof texting out of context. You have no credibility as an exegete.I reject your specious view, not the word of God. The Bible Knowledge Commentary does not agree with your unbalanced view. You are misunderstanding/misrepresenting points. If you quote other sections, it will not support your jumping to conclusions.

You throw the baby out with the bathwater in the trees of the forest, because of your myopic, negative, immature experience (you were the problem, not Pentecostalism, or else it was your fringe vs biblical Pentecostalism that was the problem). Exegesis of Scripture (which you are not doing) still trumps your subjective, imperfect, anecdotal experience.... so don't pat yourself on the back... Cults like JWs also wrongly quote your proof text to justify their minority wrong views. It is a logical fallacy to think majority is always right, but it is also not always wrong.

Do you have a belfrey in your bat, or a bonnet in your bee?
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
You underestimate the caliber of scholars that God has raised up to keep the sheep from falling for false teaching and ignorance on important subjects. Why should I trust you as an expert on things, and reject those with proven track records and godly character/insights? Eph. 4:11-13 vs internet wannabees with no training or accountability…Any credible biblical theology of John and Paul or any credible commentary or NT scholar or average believer has no problem with I Jn. vs Paul.There are many resources to help you, but you prefer fringe writers over ones that can give you more biblical answers….but I should ignore more credible sources and their documented evidence? Why, pray tell?! What school did you go to again?

Look at all relevant verses without a wrong paradigm.Try a good commentary that will interpret these verses consistent with all relevant verses vs twisting out of context with a poor interpretation.Take off your deterministic glasses to avoid proof texting/misinterpreting a verse. We can reject your view without rejecting the Bible properly interpreted.


You are an example of a nutball amateur on the wildwest of the internet.

etc.
 
Top