Dispensational problems

[Truth7t7]

Stars falling from heaven
the sky rolls up like a scroll?
What is all that?

It's not about 70AD fulfillment, don't cry in this. Disappointment

 

[Mjh29]

Just my 2 cents. I believe a large amount of Revelation has been fulfilled in 70AD. It was largely alligorical for the 'tribulation' coming to the church of that era.

HOWEVER

There are still parts of the book to be fulfilled i.e. Christ returning physically in His glory. That has not happened yet. So, mostly fulfilled, but not completely. Our Savior has yet to return.

 

[Truth7t7]

Just my 2 cents. I believe a large amount of Revelation has been fulfilled in 70AD. It was largely alligorical for the 'tribulation' coming to the church of that era.

HOWEVER

There are still parts of the book to be fulfilled i.e. Christ returning physically in His glory. That has not happened yet. So, mostly fulfilled, but not completely. Our Savior has yet to return.

Just my 2 cents, I believe "All" of the Revelation after chapter 4 is future, I believe "Nothing" past chapter 4 has been fulfilled in 70AD, just my 2 cents

Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD "Future"
Matthew 24: 21 The Great Tribulation "Future"
Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming "Future"

Just my 2 cents

 

[Mjh29]

Just my 2 cents, I believe "All" of the Revelation after chapter 4 is future, I believe "Nothing" past chapter 4 has been fulfilled in 70AD, just my 2 cents

Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD "Future"
Matthew 24: 21 The Great Tribulation "Future"
Matthew 24:30 The Second Coming "Future"

Just my 2 cents

Well, ig we have differing views.

Why do you think does the first few verses of chapter 1 say multiple times "all this must happen soon"?

 

[Mjh29]

And Christ also said "this generation shall not pass."

And by 70AD... that generation he was speaking to still had not passed. They are all well past dead today, much less in the future

 

[Truth7t7]

Well, ig we have differing views.

Why do you think does the first few verses of chapter 1 say multiple times "all this must happen soon"?

First verses of what, please explain yourself?

What Genesis 1:1-3, I haven't received the gift of mind reading?

 

[Mjh29]

First verses of what, please explain yourself?

What Genesis 1:1-3, I haven't received the gift of mind reading?

Revelation. Your.... we're talking about the book of revelation right??

Revelation 1:1. I kinda quoted it.

Too many people dive into the symbology saying it means this and that... and never bother to even read the first verse.

 

[Zao is life]

I did not realize you were such a prophecy expert.
I doubt you have even looked at the other views much like the mormon elder I described

Not Mormons or JW's because I considered their views long, long, long ago. Not SDA's because I've been there, done that and got the t-shirt. Also not Dispensationalists because the t-shirt I got after considering their views said, "Considered the views of Dispensationalists and all I got was this louzy T-shirt".

I'm actually carefully and cautiously listening to the views expressed by Preterists and Partial Preterists in these forums now, because though I don't agree with all their eschatology and theology, they have one or two valid points too (and maybe more).

So while you continue with your friendly discussions and considering the views of Mormons and continue attacking all Dispensationalists with your 95 Theses, I'll continue considering the views of people who's views I think actually count.

 

[Zao is life]

Just my 2 cents. I believe a large amount of Revelation has been fulfilled in 70AD. It was largely alligorical for the 'tribulation' coming to the church of that era.

HOWEVER

There are still parts of the book to be fulfilled i.e. Christ returning physically in His glory. That has not happened yet. So, mostly fulfilled, but not completely. Our Savior has yet to return.

Even though I don't agree, one thing your Partial-Preterist view does is concentrate on what the rest of us forget: That most of what is promised us in the New Heavens and Earth is already ours (drinking freely of the Water of Life etc), and with Preterists, this is even more the case. It also places the kind of emphasis on evangelizing the nations that many (but not all) have forgotten. AND there's no charismaniac stuff being taught. So the Preterists are one end of the pendulum and the futurists the other end, everyone else in the middle, but altogether it makes the clock tick.

 

[Zao is life]

I did not realize you were such a prophecy expert.
I doubt you have even looked at the other views much like the mormon elder I described

I know I was attacking this thread. I was attacking the subject or motive behind the thread. I know it comes across like I'm attacking you personally. I was trying to find a way of handing you an Olive branch when you made me first defend myself w.r.t the above post.
Expert: Ex = "has been/was"
Spurt = a little bigger than a drip.

You need to share your views (your own views) so I can consider them. I'm not interested in the views of Mormons.

 

[MatthewG]

Hello to you, anyone who may be reading this,

What are some of your thoughts on some of the things described below?

Is dispensation a word for administration ?

What what administration are you and me under?

If believe in fulfilment eschatology : For me all would be under the administration of Gods Grace.

If God is the one who writes on the law, on the hearts and minds of people who make the choice to believe in Christ Jesus:

to me God can by the holy spirit always can correct them (For all believers have the spirit with-in them),

especially with help of others who may simply share the word with them yet in a truthful and gentle way, that may even help a person on their way of getting back on track to seeking God, and Jesus Christ.

People make the choice to believe or not really care and reject.

Encouragement, uplift, understanding, mercy, forgiveness, kindness, and truth are all beneficial when it comes to strengthening your relationship with God and Christ.

What do you think, about what is written here?

Thank you for reading, and considering,
With love in Christ,
Matthew G.

 

[Zao is life]

Hello to you, anyone who may be reading this,

What are some of your thoughts on some of the things described below?

Is dispensation a word for administration ?

What what administration are you and me under?

If believe in fulfilment eschatology : For me all would be under the administration of Gods Grace.

If God is the one who writes on the law, on the hearts and minds of people who make the choice to believe in Christ Jesus:

to me God can by the holy spirit always can correct them (For all believers have the spirit with-in them),

especially with help of others who may simply share the word with them yet in a truthful and gentle way, that may even help a person on their way of getting back on track to seeking God, and Jesus Christ.

People make the choice to believe or not really care and reject.

Encouragement, uplift, understanding, mercy, forgiveness, kindness, and truth are all beneficial when it comes to strengthening your relationship with God and Christ.

What do you think, about what is written here?

Thank you for reading, and considering,
With love in Christ,
Matthew G.

In my opinion the word dispensation is just another way of saying there have been different Ages (Aeons) in God's unfolding plan of salvation, and Dispensationalism identifies those (whether correctly or incorrectly, makes no difference to me). To me it's just totally unimportant to the kingdom of Christ what names are given to the Age between Adam and Noah, between Noah and Moses, between Moses and Christ, since Christ, and beyond His return.

The name Dispensationalism or word dispensations is not important, IMO.

But I do believe that it's more than a little important when it's taught that some unbelievers are excluded from the kingdom of God (and of having a covenant relationship with God) because of their race, while other unbelievers are included or at least, have a covenant relationship with God because of their race, and a faulty interpretation of God's covenants is upheld in order to include those unbelievers who it is believed must be included in a covenant relationship with God because of their race.

That has nothing to do with dispensations/Ages/economies though. Nor does it make those who follow the race-doctrines I mentioned, non-Christians. I wouldn't attack those who believe this personally (I have no reason to), but I would (and do) vehemently disagree with some of the things they say when they start favoring one race over another, claiming one race of unbelievers has a covenant relationship with God regardless of their beliefs or attitudes to Christ and the blood He shed for us all. I have noticed a tendency from among Dispensationalists to issue subtle personal attacks directed at me though (not in a straight-forward manner so that it's all out in the open), but in an underhand, subtle way.

 

[Zao is life]

i suggest that feed my sheep pretty much demands it, but you might be right

Feeding the sheep has got nothing to do with the kind of judgment you and I were discussing.

But don't let me get your goat (if you'll pardon the pun).

 

[Zao is life]

@Iconoclast So understand that nothing I've said about your thread's 95 Theses is an attack on you, but I'm going to try explain why I have such a major problem with it:

1. If I were to produce a "95 theses" against, say, Catholicism, and in that theses, repeatedly use the word "Catholics""Catholics this, Catholics that"), then I would not be able to protest if the whole world of Catholics developed a very strong dislike for me, because the words I choose would make my theses a lot more than against Catholicism. The 95 Theses in this thread repeatedly uses the word "Dispensationlists", hence repeatedly not making a distinction between millions of people who believe the doctrines of Dispensationalism, and the actual doctrines.

2. The few that I read made me already come across a thesis where my Premillennial beliefs are misrepresented (and I'm not even a Dispensationalist). I have no doubt that the beliefs of Dispensationalism will also be misrepresented in these 95 theses (how many times, I don't know, because I have no knowledge of exactly what Dispensationlaism teaches. I know that some of the tenets I myself have an issue with, but beyond that, I don't know how many times Dispensationalism has been misrepresented in this thread).

The biggest issue I have with these 95 Theses though, is the repeated use of the word "Dispensationalists". It would give anyone who isn't informed much about the differences between one school of thought and another in Christendom the impression that these are really bad people being spoken about.

 

[MatthewG]

In my opinion the word dispensation is just another way of saying there have been different Ages (Aeons) in God's unfolding plan of salvation, and Dispensationalism identifies those (whether correctly or incorrectly, makes no difference to me). To me it's just totally unimportant to the kingdom of Christ what names are given to the Age between Adam and Noah, between Noah and Moses, between Moses and Christ, since Christ, and beyond His return.

Thank you for stating your opinion on what you see the word dispensation means being it another way of saying there being different Ages.

That would consider the question do you still live in the Age of the Disciples, who went out to preach the Gospel, along with who lived and ate with Jesus, living with Him for three years, up to even the point of His death on the cross. Though they did wander back to their old jobs after everything had happened only to be shown to go back by the Messiah. Only to be soon to be given the holy spirit after the Messiah had left, going onward to the Father to be seated at the right hand of God, until everything was taken care, and the bride of Christ would be taken in that age once it was over (The Age of Material Religion ~ Is what it called to me) of that would included the Wrath of God being poured out to destruction of Jerusalem in 70ad? ~> Which brings us into

(The Age of Fulfilment where everything predicated between an individual and God by their own relationship which is dwelt by the holy spirit that God gives.)

Or do you live in an Age that is ending with a new Age coming?

What are your thoughts on Ages when it comes to the bible?

When it comes to dispensation itself the actual word in Greek does mean administration. You will now know that so you will be able to have that information.

The name Dispensationalism or word dispensations is not important, IMO.

Would agree with you.

But I do believe that it's more than a little important when it's taught that some unbelievers are excluded from the kingdom of God (and of having a covenant relationship with God) because of their race, while other unbelievers are included or at least, have a covenant relationship with God because of their race, and a faulty interpretation of God's covenants is upheld in order to include those unbelievers who it is believed must be included in a covenant relationship with God because of their race.

Oh that is very unfortunate to hear who ever is having that type of problem where they believe they are chosen by God based on their race. Would agree with you that all are one in Christ: So race doesn't matter. Seems like it may be a matter of pride that resides in the flesh along with possible traumas and many choices in their life.

All people are invited to come to the Kingdom God. It is everlasting, and never ending, will increase forever. People have biases, and preferences, to me God burns that out of you if you understand that you yourself are not better than no other human beings. All people are equal, and the bible expresses for us to pray for all people, even those that may be in the charge of the nation, those who are police and every person is what the scripture suggest you, me, whoever is reading this something that is good to do.

That has nothing to do with dispensations/Ages/economies though. Nor does it make those who follow the race-doctrines I mentioned, non-Christians. I wouldn't attack those who believe this personally (I have no reason to), but I would (and do) vehemently disagree with some of the things they say when they start favoring one race over another, claiming one race of unbelievers has a covenant relationship with God regardless of their beliefs or attitudes to Christ and the blood He shed for us all.

That happens, but that sounds like something that brings bondage on the person. Being blinded, and not being able to see fully to have freedom. People are how they are, and only God can help change the person if they themselves are allowing God to help them in their life by faith in Jesus Christ.

I have noticed a tendency from among Dispensationalists to issue subtle personal attacks directed at me though (not in a straight-forward manner so that it's all out in the open), but in an underhand, subtle way.

Had it happen in life myself, friend. Pray for those who hate is that Jesus said; and despitefully use you.

Thank you for taking time to comment, and response,
With love in Christ,
Matthew G

 

[Mjh29]

Even though I don't agree, one thing your Partial-Preterist view does is concentrate on what the rest of us forget: That most of what is promised us in the New Heavens and Earth is already ours (drinking freely of the Water of Life etc), and with Preterists, this is even more the case. It also places the kind of emphasis on evangelizing the nations that many (but not all) have forgotten. AND there's no charismaniac stuff being taught. So the Preterists are one end of the pendulum and the futurists the other end, everyone else in the middle, but altogether it makes the clock tick.

Hey that's ok!!

I'm not ANYONE to be demanding others agree! (With the exception of if their soul is on the line! I cannot just stand idly by as men race themselves over the edge and into the pit.)

I am curious to know your position, if you feel like sharing?

 

[bbyrd009]

Feeding the sheep has got nothing to do with the kind of judgment you and I were discussing.

ha ok then, ty

 

[bbyrd009]

Just my 2 cents. I believe a large amount of Revelation has been fulfilled in 70AD. It was largely alligorical for the 'tribulation' coming to the church of that era.

HOWEVER

There are still parts of the book to be fulfilled i.e. Christ returning physically in His glory. That has not happened yet. So, mostly fulfilled, but not completely. Our Savior has yet to return.

imo dont bet the farm on that, k
and wadr you cant Quote “Jesus, returning” in the original, anywhere, anyway?
shuvu
hupo strepho

Return to Me, and I will return to you
(x2)

 

[bbyrd009]

“it’s like this
and like that
and like this…”

 

[Zao is life]

Just my 2 cents. I believe a large amount of Revelation has been fulfilled in 70AD. It was largely alligorical for the 'tribulation' coming to the church of that era.

Mark's record of the Olivet Dicourse is almost exactly the same as Matthew's. It's like reading the KJV and the NIV, they are so close.

But the apostles' question as recorded by Matthew is slightly different to the apostle's question recorded in Luke:

Matthew 24
3b Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the world? (Greek: aiṓn: the end of the Age).

They had no way at the time of knowing that there would be 1,950+ years between the one and the other. Even just before the Lord ascended they asked Him if He was going to restore the Kingdom to Israel at that time (Acts 1:6).

Luke 21
7b Teacher, but when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign when these things are about to take place?

In Acts 1, In His reply to the question the disciples asked Him immediately before His ascension, after telling them it was not for them to know the times and seasons which the Father has put in His own authority (Acts 1:7), Jesus repeated to them what He had told them 42 days earlier:

Acts
8 But you shall receive power, the Holy Spirit coming upon you. And you shall be witnesses to Me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and to the end of the earth.

Matthew 24
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be proclaimed in all the world as a witness to all nations. And then the end shall come.

Matthew 28
19 Therefore go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

So when the disciples asked Him, "Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the world? (Greek: aiṓn: the end of the Age). (Matthew 24:3b), they had no way of knowing just how long it was going to be before the end of the Age.

Yet, the Age in question could refer to the end of the Age during which the Jews were the custodians of the Kingdom of God. Or does it? Could it refer to the end of the Age in-between the last Age which ended in A.D 70, and the return of Christ? The gospel being preached in all the world as a witness to all nations could also refer to either Age.

I believe Jesus answered the entire loaded question, without telling them either about the 40 years between His crucifixion and A.D 70, or about the (now almost) 2,000 years since His crucifixion.

I don't believe we actually can put God into a box in time:

Revelation 5
9 And they sang a new song, saying, You are worthy to take the book and to open its seals, for You were slain and have redeemed us to God by Your blood out of every kindred and tongue and people and nation.
Romans 8
23 And not only so, but ourselves also, who have the firstfruit of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, awaiting adoption, the redemption of our body.

There is definitely an element of "already here, but not yet" to our redemption and to the Kingdom of Christ during this Age.

So I believe that Daniel 9:26-27 was completely fulfilled by A.D 70, and corresponds to the destruction of the temple and to that century's fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse.

But the fact that the Kingdom of Christ has come, does not preclude the fact that the Kingdom of Christ is coming:

Matthew 6:9-10
"After this manner therefore pray all of you: Our Father which are in heaven, Hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come, Your will be done in earth, as it is in heaven."

"And the seventh angel sounded. And there were great voices in Heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ. And He will reign forever and ever." (Revelation 11:15)

What am I actually saying?

I believe for sure A.D 70 fulfilled the Olivet Discourse - at least in the last days of that Age - and I keep my mind open to the possibility of Matthew 24:29-31 being repeated or at least fulfilled in the full sense of the meaning of the words, at the end of this Age when Christ returns. Matthew 24:29-31 is too close to 1 Corinthians 15:52 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 to ignore the (probable) link.

I believe Christ is returning, of course, but as you can see, in terms of what lies in the future and a possible future fulfillment, I don't know what to make of the Olivet Discourse.

But the box on top of my head has just enough gray matter to understand that it's because I'm human, and I shouldn't be trying to put God into any "box in time" anyway.

HOWEVER

There are still parts of the book to be fulfilled i.e. Christ returning physically in His glory. That has not happened yet. So, mostly fulfilled, but not completely. Our Savior has yet to return.

I have a feeling you'd probably disagree with me, but please bear in mind that I have studied the Revelation more than enough and for long enough to give a view that isn't ill-informed.

Without claiming to be correct in everything I believe, I believe that Revelation chapters 4-11 and 13-19 are all a Revelation concerning the final 3.5 years of this Age preceding the return of Christ. As far as what follows the return of Christ is concerned, I've put my views up here THE END OF THE PREMIL/AMIL DEBATE