Dispensationalism

[CoreIssue]

Hi CoreIssue,

I imagine you are talking about Luke here. I don't think the Bible says for certain, but there is this:

Colossian 4:10-14
10 Aristarchus my fellowprisoner saluteth you, and Marcus, sister's son to Barnabas, (touching whom ye received commandments: if he come unto you, receive him
11 And Jesus, which is called Justus, who are of the circumcision. These only are my fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God, which have been a comfort unto me.
12 Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ, saluteth you, always labouring fervently for you in prayers, that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God.
13 For I bear him record, that he hath a great zeal for you, and them that are in Laodicea, and them in Hierapolis.
14 Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you.

Aristarchus, Marcus, Barnabas, Jesus, called Justus, are all named "of the circumcision". Epaphras, Luke, and Demas are named separately.

Why the segregation in names? Why call these "of the curcumcision", and not the others? To me this indicates that Epaphras, Luke, and Demas are not. But I wouldn't be dogmatic about it.

And we don't know the authorship of Job either. Of do we? Do we know?

Much love!

Just their pattern of speech.

Plus Luke traveled with Paul.

The book of Job no we don't. It is believed he predated Israel. As did Noah and all before him.

 

[Enoch111]

So I am not a classical dispensation.

Neither am I. I believe that the dispensations and the covenants go hand-in-hand.

1. There was no covenant with Adam, and his stay in Eden was short-lived.
2. The first covenant was with Noah after the Flood.
3. The next covenant was with Abraham.
4. The next covenant was with Israel (the Old Covenant)
5. The next covenant was the New Covenant (the Church Age)
6. There are no other covenants, therefore the Millennium comes next.
7. Finally we have the eternal Kingdom of God.

A dispensation is essentially an administration or an economy. God was dealing with men at different times and in different ways. But salvation (justification) was always by grace through faith, even during the Old Covenant period. The important difference between the Old and New Covenants was that in the former the shed blood of animals merely "covered" sin. But in the New Covenant Christ "took away" the sin of the world through His shed blood and His sacrifice for sins.

 

[CoreIssue]

Neither am I. I believe that the dispensations and the covenants go hand-in-hand.

1. There was no covenant with Adam, and his stay in Eden was short-lived.
2. The first covenant was with Noah after the Flood.
3. The next covenant was with Abraham.
4. The next covenant was with Israel (the Old Covenant)
5. The next covenant was the New Covenant (the Church Age)
6. There are no other covenants, therefore the Millennium comes next.
7. Finally we have the eternal Kingdom of God.

A dispensation is essentially an administration or an economy. God was dealing with men at different times and in different ways. But salvation (justification) was always by grace through faith, even during the Old Covenant period. The important difference between the Old and New Covenants was that in the former the shed blood of animals merely "covered" sin. But in the New Covenant Christ "took away" the sin of the world through His shed blood and His sacrifice for sins.

One number five:
at the Last Supper Christ gave the new covenant of his blood.

Jeremiah and Hebrews talks about the future covenant to the houses of Israel and Judah.

So unless you believe in replacement theology those are two distinctly different covenants.

Plus the new covenant to Israel and Judah also has new laws similar to but different from the Mosaic Laws, such as blood sacrifices.

 

[CoreIssue]

Neither am I. I believe that the dispensations and the covenants go hand-in-hand.

1. There was no covenant with Adam, and his stay in Eden was short-lived.
2. The first covenant was with Noah after the Flood.
3. The next covenant was with Abraham.
4. The next covenant was with Israel (the Old Covenant)
5. The next covenant was the New Covenant (the Church Age)
6. There are no other covenants, therefore the Millennium comes next.
7. Finally we have the eternal Kingdom of God.

A dispensation is essentially an administration or an economy. God was dealing with men at different times and in different ways. But salvation (justification) was always by grace through faith, even during the Old Covenant period. The important difference between the Old and New Covenants was that in the former the shed blood of animals merely "covered" sin. But in the New Covenant Christ "took away" the sin of the world through His shed blood and His sacrifice for sins.

But you keep dismissing new covenant of blood was given by Christ at the Last Supper.

Future will be the new covenant to the houses of Israel and Judah.

You keep trying to say those two covenants of the same covenant but they are not.

 

[Enoch111]

You keep trying to say those two covenants of the same covenant but they are not.

There is ONLY ONE New Covenant, ratified with the blood of Christ.

It is applicable during the Church Age to both Jews and Gentiles, and after the Second Coming of Christ, to redeemed and restored Israel on earth, as well as the saved nations surrounding it. That New Covenant went into effect the day Christ died, and the temple veil was torn in two.

Unless you take some time to seriously study the epistle to the Hebrews, you will not see the connection between what was promised in the OT and fulfilled by Christ.

 

[CoreIssue]

There is ONLY ONE New Covenant, ratified with the blood of Christ.

It is applicable during the Church Age to both Jews and Gentiles, and after the Second Coming of Christ, to redeemed and restored Israel on earth, as well as the saved nations surrounding it. That New Covenant went into effect the day Christ died, and the temple veil was torn in two.

That is completely false.

Stone Temple returns with animal sacrifices. That is not done In the church.

So which are you, Israel or Judah?

 

[charity]

Hello there,

Dispensationalism - is a useful tool, but a means to an end only: - which is the knowledge of God in Christ Jesus. All forms of study must have that as it's goal and objective. That we may 'know Him', and be found, 'in Him'.

'Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss
.. for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord:
.... for whom I have suffered the loss of all things,
...... and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
And be found in Him,
.. not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law,
.... but that which is through the faith of Christ,
...... the righteousness which is of God by faith:
That I may know Him,
.. and the power of His resurrection,
.... and the fellowship of His sufferings,
...... being made conformable unto His death;
........ If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.'
(Philippians 3:8-11)

Praise His Holy Name!

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Dave L]

replacement theology at DuckDuckGo

Replacement theology is an empty concept. I's like saying I'm going to replace my car with my car.

 

[Dave L]

You dwelling on Abraham etc. is exactly what
Blows into covenant theology do.

I made it quite clear I am not into the version of dispensationalism you keep going on. Neither are a lot of others.

But replacement theology sure has no place in the Bible. Nor do your claims.

Watch the video. See if you can deal with what he says there since he is not into the form of dispensationalism you do on either.

If Dispensationalism is true, they wouldn't keep changing it.

 

[Dave L]

Hello there,

Dispensationalism - is a useful tool, but a means to an end only: - which is the knowledge of God in Christ Jesus. All forms of study must have that as it's goal and objective. That we may 'know Him', and be found, 'in Him'.

'Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss
.. for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord:
.... for whom I have suffered the loss of all things,
...... and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
And be found in Him,
.. not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law,
.... but that which is through the faith of Christ,
...... the righteousness which is of God by faith:
That I may know Him,
.. and the power of His resurrection,
.... and the fellowship of His sufferings,
...... being made conformable unto His death;
........ If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.'
(Philippians 3:8-11)

Praise His Holy Name!

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

I agree with your focus on Christ. But I understand classic Dispensationalism more as a human invention that forces unnatural interpretations on scripture making them to fit the scheme. Mid Acts Dispensationalism seems to ignore teachings of Christ that define Christianity and are necessary for salvation. But you probably know more about Mid-Acts than I do at this point.

 

[charity]

I agree with your focus on Christ. But I understand classic Dispensationalism more as a human invention that forces unnatural interpretations on scripture making them to fit the scheme. Mid Acts Dispensationalism seems to ignore teachings of Christ that define Christianity and are necessary for salvation. But you probably know more about Mid-Acts than I do at this point
.

'Study to shew thyself approved unto God,
a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
rightly dividing the word of truth.'
(2 Timothy 2:15)

Hello Dave L,

That has not been my experience.

I am an Acts 28 dispensationalist. However it is the principle of 2 Timothy 2:15, which has been the most liberating of instruction for me, also the Berean spirit of Acts 17:11:-

'These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of mind,
and searched the scriptures daily,
whether those things were so.'
(Act 17:11)

* I believe in the full inspiration of the Scriptures, the right division of the Scriptures, and of course, the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the all-sufficiency of His one sacrifice.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Dave L]

'Study to shew thyself approved unto God,
a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
rightly dividing the word of truth.'
(2 Timothy 2:15)

Hello Dave L,

That has not been my experience.

I am an Acts 28 dispensationalist. However it is the principle of 2 Timothy 2:15, which has been the most liberating of instruction for me, also the Berean spirit of Acts 17:11:-

'These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of mind,
and searched the scriptures daily,
whether those things were so.'
(Act 17:11)

* I believe in the full inspiration of the Scriptures, the right division of the Scriptures, and of course, the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the all-sufficiency of His one sacrifice.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

So far I can only divide New Covenant from Old Covenant. And the New Covenant into being written and having been written.

 

[charity]

So far I can only divide New Covenant from Old Covenant. And the New Covenant into being written and having been written.

Hi @Dave L.

The division into 'Old' and 'New' are of man's contrivance though aren't they? For in terms of content, the 'New' follows on from the 'Old' quite naturally, being no division at all.

I have been considering other, 'divisions', recently, in regard to the way that God has spoken, which Hebrews 1:1 tells us was at 'sundry times' and in 'divers manners'. The 'times' are quite distinct, and the 'manners' also, forming divisions in themselves.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[CoreIssue]

If Dispensationalism is true, they wouldn't keep changing it.

So you believe everything is exactly the same today as it was before the resurrection?

 

[Dave L]

So you believe everything is exactly the same today as it was before the resurrection?

I know we have the Old Covenant replaced by the New. And the gifts replaced by New Covenant scripture. But I don't see anything beyond that up until Jesus returns.

 

[Dave L]

Hi @Dave L.

The division into 'Old' and 'New' are of man's contrivance though aren't they? For in terms of content, the 'New' follows on from the 'Old' quite naturally, being no division at all.

I have been considering other, 'divisions', recently, in regard to the way that God has spoken, which Hebrews 1:1 tells us was at 'sundry times' and in 'divers manners'. The 'times' are quite distinct, and the 'manners' also, forming divisions in themselves.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

About the covenants, The Ten Commandments were the Old Covenant.That is why they called it the Ark of the Covenant that held the two tablets. And The New Covenant replaced the Old. But some things remain. The Church remains although stripped of the State and unbelievers. Jesus is YAHWEH incarnate. The new birth previously called circumcision of the heart and the faith it spawns remains. But New Covenant style repentance produces the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Those are some of the similarities I can think of right now.

 

[prism]

Paul says all believers are Israel.

Not always.
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. (Rom 11:25)

 

[Dave L]

Not always.
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. (Rom 11:25)

When does the fullness of the gentiles come in (to Israel)? On the last day.

“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world [gentiles] for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” (Matthew 24:14)

 

[marks]

2 Timothy 2:14-16 YLT
14 These things remind [them] of, testifying fully before the Lord -- not to strive about words to nothing profitable, but to the subversion of those hearing;
15 be diligent to present thyself approved to God -- a workman irreproachable, rightly dividing the word of the truth;
16 and the profane vain talkings stand aloof from, for to more impiety they will advance,

Rightly dividing . . .

From Robertson's Word Pictures, "late and rare compound (orthotomos), cutting straight,"

Make a straight cut.

Rightly dividing the word of truth.

Much love!
Mark

 

[Dave L]

2 Timothy 2:14-16 YLT
14 These things remind [them] of, testifying fully before the Lord -- not to strive about words to nothing profitable, but to the subversion of those hearing;
15 be diligent to present thyself approved to God -- a workman irreproachable, rightly dividing the word of the truth;
16 and the profane vain talkings stand aloof from, for to more impiety they will advance,

Rightly dividing . . .

From Robertson's Word Pictures, "late and rare compound (orthotomos), cutting straight,"

Make a straight cut.

Rightly dividing the word of truth.

Much love!
Mark

The problem is Dispensationalists arbitrarily divide the word of truth.