ECT What is the true root objection to MAD?

[Nang]

This indicates salvation as Paul preached it hadn't gone to Gentiles until Israel had fallen.

God was saving souls by His grace, before there was ever a nation of Israel.

 

[Cross Reference]

God was saving souls by His grace, before there was ever a nation of Israel.

But could their souls enter His presence when they died?

 

[Nang]

But could their souls enter His presence when they died?

Why not?

 

[Cross Reference]

Right, when the fullness of the gentiles comes in.

and when do you suppose that would be?

 

[Nick M]

God was saving souls by His grace, before there was ever a nation of Israel.

Made up. Let's check on the truth, not Nag's lies.

Romans 5

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

 

[Nick M]

and when do you suppose that would be?

I will find out with the rest of the saints when the church departs. If it was to happen in my lifetime. You will know when we are gone and you will have to endure to the end.

 

[Cross Reference]

I will find out with the rest of the saints when the church departs. If it was to happen in my lifetime. You will know and you will have to endure to the end.

You gotta rude awaking awaiting yu, bub.

 

[Nick M]

You gotta rude awaking awaiting yu, bub.

How so? I am well known to him. I trust and believe him. I am sealed by the Holy Spirit until that day. Then I get my new body. Or I am resurrected. One or the other.

 

[Cross Reference]

How so? I am well known to him. I trust and believe him. I am sealed by the Holy Spirit until that day. Then I get my new body. Or I am resurrected. One or the other.

:wave:

 

[Lazy afternoon]

How so? I am well known to him. I trust and believe him. I am sealed by the Holy Spirit until that day. Then I get my new body. Or I am resurrected. One or the other.

No saint calls other believers Christ hating pigs and the like as you and your mates do ,and thinks they are fit for the first resurrection without full repentance, confession, and obtaining forgiveness.

LA

 

[csuguy]

Romans 11

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

What you say is not kosher with what Paul said. Read it again. Pun intended.

You make the mistake of thinking that he is here saying that all of Israel fell. Obviusly that is not true - Paul is himself an Israelite. Rather -

Romans 11:25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;​

Of course, you should know this since you claim to know what Romans 11 says.

 

[Lazy afternoon]

csuguy,

It is interesting that the Bible should say that THROUGH their fall that salvation would come to the gentiles.

I would have to think that God was bound by law to keep salvation among the Jews and only when that covenant was ended by their fall and judgment though the death of Christ that it could come among all nations.

Previous to that any gentile could enter the then existing covenant with God according to the Old covenant rules.

What do you think?

LA

 

[dreadknought]

First, my own understanding of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism is briefly this:

God chose a nation through whom He promised to someday bless the whole earth. That nation was Israel and that choosing involved various covenants. Christ Jesus came as Israel’s promised Redeemer, and through Israel – His nation of priests – He would redeem the whole world.

The problem is, Israel rejected Him. Not every individual Jew did so but Israel corporately, as a nation, despised Him and had Him crucified by Rome. But rising from the dead and ascending into Heaven, His apostles preached that if Israel repented and believed on Him as their Messiah, He would return to establish the long-awaited Kingdom, just as God had promised and as the Old Testament prophets had foretold.

But once again, Israel refused to bow to her Messiah. After the leaders stoned Stephen to death, God temporarily set Israel aside and temporarily suspended all fulfillment of prophecy.

At that point, God began to usher in the previously unmentioned dispensation of grace, which is now in effect and will remain so until He decides to bring it to an end.

During this age of grace, salvation is no longer to the Jew first. Previously unknown blessings and riches are promised equally to Jew and Gentile alike on the simple basis of faith alone in Christ’s death, burial and resurrection for the individual’s sin, without works of any kind either to be saved, stay saved or prove that one is saved, for God knows those who are His.


That is my understanding of MAD stated as briefly as I can state it.

Now the question is, Why do people who reject MAD seem to find it more intolerable than other doctrinal systems with which they also do not agree? I have found two basic reasons.

1. They don’t really understand MAD because what they have heard is not accurate. They believe a straw man version of MAD. In response, MADs try to clarify our position but usually with limited success.

2. They do understand MAD, or enough of it to hate what it implies for their own doctrinal position. I’ve found this to be the most common of the two, at least on TOL.

When you dig deep enough, informed objections to MAD (#2 above) tend to stem from one of two related roots. The opponent to MAD believes either (a) that the Christian Church has in some sense inherited the promised blessings, signs and covenants that God made solely with, or intended only for, national Israel, or (b) that the Christian Church has replaced national Israel outright. There is usually overlap between these two positions as they do stem from the same root, but objections boil down to one or the other.

Objection (a) can be seen in the opposition to MAD by Pentecostals, charismatics, various cultists and works-oriented members of Christendom who have been deceived into adopting Israel’s deactivated covenant works or sign gifts as necessary to salvation today, or necessary to their sanctification – some version of water baptism being the #1 expression of this error. Thus very, very few within Christendom today truly believe as Paul taught, that salvation is received by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without works. THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS but almost all opponents of MAD, if they’re honest, will admit that they believe some degree of human religious effort [works] is involved in either getting themselves saved or keeping themselves saved. According to Paul, all such are believing a false gospel (Gal 1:8-9).

Objection (b) is straightforward enough among those denominations and cults that have adopted some variation on Replacement theology, wherein it is believed God will never again deal with Israel as His nation and all of His promises (and even warnings) have already been fulfilled in the past and/or fulfilled in the Christian church; hence the foolish "Zionist" label that is sometimes thrown against MADs as well as other dispensationalists.

In my opinion, even though they claim to uphold the entirety of God's Word (which they invariably and falsely accuse MADs of not doing), those holding to either of these dual errors deny the reliability of God and His Word because He has promised to someday once again deal with the world via Christ's redeemed nation Israel. However, He will do this ONLY after He has ended this dispensation of grace wherein there is “no distinction” between Jew and Gentile. In the meantime, He is not sovereignty judging anyone for error; He is not opening the ground beneath the feet of lying teachers and false prophets. He has given His Word and His Gospel of grace. For now He has nothing more to say. Such is grace!

So while some, by God's grace, do come to see the revelation of the mystery (Eph 3:8-9), the leaven of the errors described above - taking what God intended only for Israel while rejecting all He's given to the Body of Christ, and you can't have both - can only compound, spread and grow worse as this age of grace draws to its inevitable close.

This looks great, yet the Scriptures teach covenant, not do this to be saved for this age, do this for that. Ya'll will have to talk to Paul someday, and how badly all dispensationalists have misrepresented him.

 

[csuguy]

csuguy,

It is interesting that the Bible should say that THROUGH their fall that salvation would come to the gentiles.

I would have to think that God was bound by law to keep salvation among the Jews and only when that covenant was ended by their fall and judgment though the death of Christ that it could come among all nations.

Previous to that any gentile could enter the then existing covenant with God according to the Old covenant rules.

What do you think?

LA

Salvation is still among the jews. In fact, Jesus tells us that salvation is from the jews. Jesus is, after all, a Jew, and Israel remains God's People. It is through the promises given them (the New Covenant) that salvation has come to the Gentiles.

Israel has not disappeared, nor will it. Nor will it cease to be God's People. Rather, gentiles join Israel under the New Covenant. Also, the Old Covenant - while obsolete - is still in effect until all is accomplished.

Gentiles were indeed free to join under the Old Covenant as well. But the Old Covenant, the Law, does not save. Rather, it brings condemnation for sin. While we should still study the Old Covenant, we shouldn't try to keep to the letter of the Law. Rather, we study it to learn the Spirit of the Law - God's Law. This we are under, and under the New Covenant God's Law is written on our hearts.

 

[elohiym]

The gentiles (the wild olive) are grafted in with Israel (the natural vine/branches), and both share in the nourishment of the root (Christ)

You seem to be blinded to the Grace Message given to Paul by
the 'Risen Christ?'

Your question evades poster csuguy's point. He's correct.

 

[Nick M]

No saint calls other believers Christ hating pigs

I don't disagree you Christ hating pig. See how that works. You twist (pervert) the gospel. Paul says let you go to hell. Sorry you don't like it.

 

[Nick M]

You make the mistake of thinking that he is here saying that all of Israel fell. Obviusly that is not true - Paul is himself an Israelite.

I made no mistake. He is talking of Israel as a country. Israel is the olive tree. You can not reconcile your statement with Paul's claims which are from the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[elohiym]

It's simple. MAD is an unnecessarily complicated interpretation of scripture. There are simpler and more cogent interpretations of the history.

:up:

I don't hate MAD or MADdists. I feel sort of sorry for them in a way.

:up:

 

[elohiym]

Israel is the olive tree.

That is csuguy's claim. He is correct. Unfortunately you don't see the ramifications for MAD doctrine.

 

[dreadknought]

Salvation is still among the jews. In fact, Jesus tells us that salvation is from the jews. Jesus is, after all, a Jew, and Israel remains God's People. It is through the promises given them (the New Covenant) that salvation has come to the Gentiles.

Israel has not disappeared, nor will it. Nor will it cease to be God's People. Rather, gentiles join Israel under the New Covenant. Also, the Old Covenant - while obsolete - is still in effect until all is accomplished.

Gentiles were indeed free to join under the Old Covenant as well. But the Old Covenant, the Law, does not save. Rather, it brings condemnation for sin. While we should still study the Old Covenant, we shouldn't try to keep to the letter of the Law. Rather, we study it to learn the Spirit of the Law - God's Law. This we are under, and under the New Covenant God's Law is written on our hearts.

This is not true. Rome tore Israel apart. Physical Israel wasn't a modern reality until dispensationalists used an atrocity to send some to a land, not theirs by law, with force.