What Dispensationalist Believe

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

dan p

New Member
Mar 26, 2009
358
0
0
Hi to all . What I believe that Pauline Dispensationalism means to me and the verses to prove it . 1) It is a fact that Dispensationalism is in the Bible , whether , you don't believe IT, or whether you understand it or NOT . 2) And it has always been in the Bible waiting to be understood for over 2000 years , and every day I become more knowledgeable in what Paul was trying to reveal to us .3) The objective of Pauline Dispensationalism is to study the WORD of God rightly divided in order to see the many differences in the Bible and to understand why they are there , Some of these " DIFFERENCES are ,3) A difference between Bible Judaism and Bible Christianity .4) A difference bewtween the Nation of Israel and the Body of Christ .5) A difference between the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Gospel of the Grace of God .6) A difference between Prophecy in the Old Testament and the Mystery revealed to the Apostle Paul , the Apostle of the Gentiles .7) A difference between the Law of Moses and the Grace of God .8) A difference between the ministries of Peter and Paul .9) A difference between Christ's coming for Israel and Christ's coming for His Assembly , the Body oof Christ .10) A difference between the blessing of Israel and the blessing for the Body of Christ .11) A difference between the future of Israel and the future of the Body of Christ .12) A difference between Christ's ministry on eath and Christ's ministry from heaven .13) A difference between the commands of the Law of Moses and the commands of the Grace of God .14) This what Dispensationalism is all about .
 

bethog

New Member
Mar 29, 2009
83
0
0
65
QUOTE (dan p @ Apr 2 2009, 08:13 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71632
5) A difference between the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Gospel of the Grace of God.
You still need to read the Word of God and to allow the Holy Spirit to teach you concerning the “Kingdom” and the “Gospel”. This thing that you believe that there are different kinds of gospels is not only unscriptural, but it is heresy.QUOTE (dan p @ Apr 2 2009, 08:13 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71632
9) A difference between Christ's coming for Israel and Christ's coming for His Assembly, the Body of Christ.
Can you give Scripture “in context”?
 

bethog

New Member
Mar 29, 2009
83
0
0
65
QUOTE
Dispensationalism is a Protestant evangelical theology and interpretive framework for understanding the overall flow of the Bible. Rooted in the writings of John Nelson Darby, the term derives from the concept of a "dispensation" or administration referring to a series of chronologically successive dispensations that emphasize certain Biblical covenants, and that the nation of Israel is distinct from the Church. Most believe that God is going to fulfill His promises to national Israel in the process of Israel being revitalized, that Christ will rule the world from there upon His return, and they deny the teachings of Replacement Theology (supersessionism). The teachings of Dispensationalism contain a distinctive eschatological "end times" component, as all dispensationalists hold to premillennialism and most hold to the pretribulation rapture. In other areas of theology, dispensationalists hold to a wide range of beliefs within the evangelical and fundamentalist spectrum.
So you are this big fan of “Dispensationalism” which is rooted in the writings of a man by the name of John Nelson Darby. I in the other hand believe the Bible, the Word of God. There are truths with which I do agree, but you seem to be so taken with this big word that it overshadows everything else. And if this story of different kinds of Gopels came from this man, he had it all wrong. With the diagram I added you will see that there are different views also, and they can not all be right.
 

Jordan

Active Member
Apr 6, 2007
4,875
6
38
QUOTE (bethog @ Apr 2 2009, 01:54 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71634
So you are this big fan of “Dispensationalism” which is rooted in the writings of a man by the name of John Nelson Darby. I in the other hand believe the Bible, the Word of God. There are truths with which I do agree, but you seem to be so taken with this big word that it overshadows everything else. And if this story of different kinds of Gopels came from this man, he had it all wrong. With the diagram I added you will see that there are different views also, and they can not all be right.
No, John Nelson Darby did not created it... He only perverted it. Dispensationalism is about on God's time frame.
 

watchman

New Member
Feb 7, 2008
158
3
0
50
QUOTE (Jordan @ Apr 2 2009, 02:30 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71636
No, John Nelson Darby did not created it... He only perverted it. Dispensationalism is about on God's time frame.
The word dispensation is in the Bible and may speak of the timing of God, but what is known as dispensationalism is the theology thought up by Darby, and yes it is a perversion of God's Word.
 

WhiteKnuckle

New Member
Mar 29, 2009
866
42
0
47
I'm done dealing with this "Dispensation" deal. It maybe important to "understand Gods timeframe", I don't know. Atleast it's not given to me to see a reason it would matter. Personally, I don't care about Gods time frame, or what year he did what for who. On the otherhand, to argue against evolution, I see it can be important. However, this does not seem to be the reason for the "dispensation doctrine" But for me, it doesn't matter.God does what he does, and in his own time. Just because God said something like, "A day to me is a thousand years to you" is nothing to base a whole entire doctrine on in my opinion. I seriously think I'm going to let all this rest for a while and see what God reveals.
 

Jordan

Active Member
Apr 6, 2007
4,875
6
38
QUOTE (WhiteKnuckle @ Apr 2 2009, 04:18 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71641
I'm done dealing with this "Dispensation" deal. It maybe important to "understand Gods timeframe", I don't know. Atleast it's not given to me to see a reason it would matter. Personally, I don't care about Gods time frame, or what year he did what for who. On the otherhand, to argue against evolution, I see it can be important. However, this does not seem to be the reason for the "dispensation doctrine" But for me, it doesn't matter.God does what he does, and in his own time. Just because God said something like, "A day to me is a thousand years to you" is nothing to base a whole entire doctrine on in my opinion. I seriously think I'm going to let all this rest for a while and see what God reveals.
Well, that is your choice to make, but God's time frame is very important, cause1. It's clearly in the bibleand2. It's important to understand it's prophecy using His time frame. Especially the past before we were humans, but that bears studying to do.
 

dan p

New Member
Mar 26, 2009
358
0
0
QUOTE (bethog @ Apr 2 2009, 02:34 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71633
You still need to read the Word of God and to allow the Holy Spirit to teach you concerning the “Kingdom” and the “Gospel”. This thing that you believe that there are different kinds of gospels is not only unscriptural, but it is heresy.Can you give Scripture “in context”?
Hi bethog , I can read just fine , but I see some who can't process what is written and just give the same old rhetoric , that it is unscriptual , but NEVER offer verses showing it wrong , but I expected that .1) Turn to Matt 24: and we see that the context is the Tribulation , by verses 7 , 15 22 , 29 , and see Acts 2: 17-21 , and that is context , brother .2) In Matt 14 , and this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in alL the world for a witness unto to all nations , and then shall the end come , how is that for context ? 3) There is a problem with this Gospel , because you have to edure unto the end of the Tribulation to be saved , in v13 . You can not take the Mark . 4) The context is also talking about the Second Coming of Christ in Matt 24: 27-31 , good context for you , two birds with one Chapter in Matt . 5) I know that people like you who have never heard of Gal 2:7-8 , and see that there is the Gospel of UN-circumcision , which is to the Gentiles and then there is the Gospel of the Circumcision , that is a shock to those who only believe in one Gospel .6) Paul was given the GOOD NEWS ( GOSPEL ) in Acts 20:24 , Rom 1:1 .7) Than in Rom 16: 25 , Paul's Gospel has the power establish you , by his gospel , by the revelation of the Mystery , that that the 12 Apostles did NOT preach , and in v26 made for the obedience ( talking to you , bethog ) of FAITH . QUOTE (Jordan @ Apr 2 2009, 03:30 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71636
No, John Nelson Darby did not created it... He only perverted it. Dispensationalism is about on God's time frame.
1) Hi Jordon , I have never read Darby , and maybe you can give and example of his perversion ? I would like to know . I know of Charles Baker, C R Stam and R C Brock , for these are dispensationalists that I know .
 

WhiteKnuckle

New Member
Mar 29, 2009
866
42
0
47
QUOTE (Jordan @ Apr 2 2009, 06:11 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71649
Well, that is your choice to make, but God's time frame is very important, cause1. It's clearly in the bibleand2. It's important to understand it's prophecy using His time frame. Especially the past before we were humans, but that bears studying to do.
Maybe so. But, as far as prophecy I can see the signs. You are right in a way, (not that I'm saying anyone is right or wrong on this mind you) Because, as far as, How long is the "milenial reign" How long is a seventy sevens, things like that. But as far as saying, (and again, this is my understanding of this whole thing) Okay, since a day to God is 1000 years to us, that means, that "in 1000 years this will happen" Or in, "for the sake of the elect the days will be shortened" so that means, "Well, days, okay, 1000 year increments, so, now since the days are shortened, then it's roughly 800 or 900 or maybe even 500 years, or whatever number we wanna put in place of short." Or even what's more, "mans years shall me numbered 120" So, we now have 120,000 years left. Great, so, if we have 120,000 years, we've burnt up roughly 12,000 of those. So, the signs we're seeing are not infact the signs of the end, but just the same things that have been happening for the last 12k. So still need a little over 100,000 years or so for the beginning of the end.I know I sound like a prick here, but seriously, I'm not understanding (obviously) and to me personaly, It's not anything that matters to me. If it's benifitial to you or anyone else, Great! But for me I don't see anything in it that would benifit me.
 

bethog

New Member
Mar 29, 2009
83
0
0
65
I do not want to start a new thread, so I will add this here. “Those who embrace a dispensational view have difficulty reconciling many of the Olivet Discourse passages”. QUOTE
Resolving the Olivet Discourseby Chuck MisslerIt is ironic that Jesus' opening imperative in His "Olivet Discourse" is "Take heed that no man deceive you."1 This is His command, but it begs a question of means: "How do we avoid that?" There seems to be more conjectures and misunderstandings over this passage than almost any other in the New Testament. The tools to avoid deception derive from a study of epistemology: the study of knowledge - its scope and limits. Our exploration of this passage will challenge more than simply our hermeneutics alone. It will challenge our grasp of the whole eschatological plan in its entirety. For many students of eschatology - the study of last things - the so-called Olivet Discourse has proven to be a troublesome passage, with many finding it confusing and ostensibly self-contradictory; a hermeneutical battleground between the dispensationalists and the preterists, etc. The preterists insist that this passage - and the Book of Revelation - has been already fulfilled, and much of it is dismissed by them as simply allegorical. Yet even those who embrace a dispensational view have difficulty reconciling many of the Olivet Discourse passages. Resolving Power In optics, the resolving power of a telescope determines its ability to distinguish between two close, but distinct, stars. An apparent single star viewed with a cheap telescope turns out to be a pair of distinctly separate stars when viewed with a telescope of better optical quality. This quality is known as the "resolving power" of its optics. We seem to have an analogous situation here. In this case, we may benefit by setting aside our presumptions and presuppositions and let the several texts speak for themselves. A Hazardous Tradition The traditional "harmonization of the Gospels" is part of the problem. Ever since Augustine, scholars have attempted to meld the four distinct Gospels into a combined narrative. While this can be useful for a cursory review of the life of Christ, it can also result in a myopia of sorts and the "Olivet Discourse" (recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21) is a salient example. Since Matthew was skilled in shorthand, we tend to lean on his detailed rendering. And yet there seems to be a substantial disparity between his record and that of Luke's. Numerous elements appear identical in both accounts, so it has been fashionable - for 1700 years - to assume that they both deal with the same event. Attempts to "harmonize" them have continued to yield a treacherous minefield of confusion. Trusting the Texts It seems that setting aside all of our presuppositions, and simply trusting the integrity of the texts may improve our "resolving power" in addressing these passages. Jesus called us to respect the details,2 so let's take a closer look at each of them. They each may be focusing on different events from a different perspective and maybe even addressing different audiences on different occasions. The similarities of expression in the various accounts may have caused us to jump to premature conjectures, etc. The Beginning of Sorrows Matthew's account opens with a series of ominous signs: For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows [or "birth pangs"]. Matthew 24:5-8 Luke's account contains the ostensibly identical series of signs: But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by. Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven. Luke 21:9-11 It would seem that these, and many other similarities throughout the respective passages, appear to be a summary of the same teachings by our Lord on the same occasion. (Many scholars note that these specific signs also seem to parallel the same series of signs in the opening of the Seven Seals in Revelation Chapter 6. See graphic.) Matthew's account continues, "Then shall…" (verses 9, 10, 11, et al.). The bulk of his record deals with events after these "sorrows" or birth pangs. He (as well as Mark) further introduces - and emphasizes - an additional sign that is omitted from Luke's account: When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Matthew 24:15 This proves to be a major verse for a number of reasons. Here Jesus saves us hours of boring library research by authenticating the authorship of Daniel, and his role as a prophet. Jesus also referred to a key historical event: the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes that had occurred two centuries earlier in 167 b.c. This historical event was well known to every Jew, and the subsequent rededication of the desecrated Temple is still celebrated every year at Hanukkah. (This is even alluded to in John 10:22.) The "Abomination of Desolation" refers to Antiochus' establishing an idol to Zeus in the Holy of Holies that precipitated the Macabbean revolt, which ultimately threw off the Seleucid yoke and ushered in the rule of the Hasmoneans. It is referred to four times in Daniel.3 But here, Jesus is indicating that this desecration will happen again and that this time it will usher in a period that Jesus Himself labels "the Great Tribulation" (quoting from Daniel4 and which Jeremiah called "the time of Jacob's trouble."5 (Both Matthew's and Mark's renderings also include the parenthetical admonition to the reader for understanding!) Luke's Divergence Luke's account focuses on a siege of Jerusalem that is substantially divergent from the Matthew account. It is the presumption that they are both dealing with the same event that is the source of misunderstandings. Everyone seems to overlook what Luke says after mentioning the famed series of signs: But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake. Luke 21:12 Luke then focuses on a desolation of Jerusalem that precedes the series of signs that earmark both passages! Matthew focuses on a desolation that follows that same series of signs. Luke's rendering deals with the fall of Jerusalem that occurred 38 years later in 70 a.d. Matthew all but ignores it. Luke notes that "this generation shall not pass away until all be fulfilled."6 It is interesting that Jerusalem fell 38 years later, the very same duration that it took for that earlier generation to expire during the wanderings in the wilderness.7 In contrast, Matthew's account deals with events that follow that same series of signs, including the Abomination of Desolation announced in Matthew 24:15. (Some try to suggest that this event happened during the siege of 70 a.d., but that is contrary to the substantial eye witness accounts recorded. A war was going on and no idol was so established, "standing in the Holy Place," etc. In fact, Titus was frustrated by the fire that broke out in the Temple8 and he later had to command his soldiers to dismantle it "stone by stone" to recover the gold that had melted, etc.9 This, too, was a fulfillment of our Lord's prophecy.10) It is important to note the details of the attacks of the Romans in 66-70 a.d. Vespasian and his son, Titus, were sent by Nero to make war with the Jews.11 However, the death of Nero delayed the siege, and subsequently Vespasian acceded to the throne of the empire and left his son Titus to complete the siege.12 Luke's account had warned his listeners: And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. Luke 21:20-21 Over 1,100,000 perished in the siege. Those who heeded Jesus' warning apparently escaped. Some scholars infer that few, if any, Christians perished in the siege. By contrast, Matthew's account conspicuously terminates with the Second Coming of Christ and the cosmic upheavals incident thereto, which are alluded to in both accounts. When we were in school, learning to diagram sentences was useful in understanding grammar: subject, predicate, adverbial phrases, etc. Here, too, a composite diagram may prove helpful (see graphic). Matthew's account - and - written for the Jew, seems destined to be a survival handbook for those enduring the forthcoming unprecedented time. Luke's, on the other hand, written for the Gentiles, seems to totally ignore the Great Tribulation. In fact, it would seem that his readers shouldn't be concerned: And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. Luke 21:28 (The word for "redemption," apolutrosis, appears nine times in the New Testament, and always is used to refer to the redemption of the Body.) There are numerous complex issues that still emerge from these several accounts. It isn't clear that they even occurred at the same time or place. Matthew and Mark clearly identify a private briefing on the Mount of Olives to the "insider" group of disciples (see graphic). Luke, on the other hand, remarks: And in the day time he was teaching in the Temple; and at night he went out, and abode in the mount that is called the Mount of Olives. And all the people came early in the morning to him in the Temple, for to hear him. Luke 21:36-38
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------**NOTES**--------------------------------------------------------------------------------​
Matthew 24:3; Luke 21:8. 2. Matthew 5:17,18. Daniel 8:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11. Daniel 12:1. Cf. Daniel 9:27. Jeremiah 30:7. Luke 21:32. Deuteronomy 2:14. Josephus Flavius, The Wars of the Jews, Book 6, IV 1 Ibid., Book 7, I 1ff. Matthew 24:2; Luke 19:44. Josephus Flavius, The Wars of the Jews, Book 2, XXII 2ff. Ibid. Book 4, X 7ff.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------​
 

Martin W.

Active Member
Jan 16, 2009
817
37
28
70
Winnipeg Canada
QUOTE (dan p @ Apr 2 2009, 01:13 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=71632
Hi to all . What I believe that Pauline Dispensationalism means to me and the verses to prove it . 1) It is a fact that Dispensationalism is in the Bible , whether , you don't believe IT, or whether you understand it or NOT . 2) And it has always been in the Bible waiting to be understood for over 2000 years , and every day I become more knowledgeable in what Paul was trying to reveal to us .3) The objective of Pauline Dispensationalism is to study the WORD of God rightly divided in order to see the many differences in the Bible and to understand why they are there , Some of these " DIFFERENCES are ,3) A difference between Bible Judaism and Bible Christianity .4) A difference bewtween the Nation of Israel and the Body of Christ .5) A difference between the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Gospel of the Grace of God .6) A difference between Prophecy in the Old Testament and the Mystery revealed to the Apostle Paul , the Apostle of the Gentiles .7) A difference between the Law of Moses and the Grace of God .8) A difference between the ministries of Peter and Paul .9) A difference between Christ's coming for Israel and Christ's coming for His Assembly , the Body oof Christ .10) A difference between the blessing of Israel and the blessing for the Body of Christ .11) A difference between the future of Israel and the future of the Body of Christ .12) A difference between Christ's ministry on eath and Christ's ministry from heaven .13) A difference between the commands of the Law of Moses and the commands of the Grace of God .14) This what Dispensationalism is all about .
I like the way you have laid this out 'dan p'. You are correct and I agree. Thanks.God has always been a dispesationalist. Some men try to change that , but they fail.Martin W.
 

dan p

New Member
Mar 26, 2009
358
0
0
QUOTE (Martin W. @ Apr 8 2009, 04:46 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=72084
I like the way you have laid this out 'dan p'. You are correct and I agree. Thanks.God has always been a dispesationalist. Some men try to change that , but they fail.Martin W.
1) Hi Matin W , glad that you agree , and I know that there are many that say What they think I believe , BUT got there information from those that write books attacking Dispensationalists , but I am not offended , as long as I can have my say . 2) It is hard for those who refuse to believe that the word Dispensation is in the Bible , and that only Paul talks about it, and reveals what it really means , dan p
 

Glenn

New Member
Apr 5, 2009
30
0
0
Hi all.Ah yes the but nows, do seem to cause a fuss with the but thens.I bruise easy so don't hit me to hard.Grace and Peace Glen.
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
Dispensations itself has little to do with Darby who was a fool as Jordan says he only preverted it with own doctrine ..It is written in the bible but it is not as any here have described it ...It is Gods plan/blueprint for maintaining and managing his creation his family us... God has dispensations of time the structure of his plan... within each dispensation there can be sub catogories.. for instance we have might have Creation : ... Man .....time of innocense....The fall... ect THE MEANING OF THE WORD DISPENSATIONThe word which is translated dispensation in the New Testament is oikonomia, from which the English word economy is derived. The New Testament word is a combination of two words - oikos, which means house and nemo, which means to dispense, manage, or hold sway. 11 Thus, the word literally means house dispensing or house managing.THE USAGE OF THE WORD FOR DISPENSATION IN THE NEW TESTAMENT The word oikonomia appears nine times in the New Testament. In six of these appearances (Lk. 16:2-4; 1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 3:2; Col. 1:25) it is translated stewardship or dispensation and refers to a responsible office or ministry entrusted to one's care by a higher authority. In the other three appearances (Eph 1:10; 3:9; 1 Tim. 1:4) it is translated dispensation, fellowship, and edifying in the King James Version and administration in the New American Standard Bible. In these three passages it refers to a particular way of God's administering His rule over the world. Ephesians 1:10 is of special interest, for it appears to refer to the particular way that God will administer His rule in the coming Millennium (the Millennial Dispensation). Ephesians 3:9 and 1 Timothy 1:4 refer to the particular way that God administers His rule now (the present dispensation).E) DEFINITION OF THE TERM DISPENSATION AS IT RELATES TO DISPENSATIONAL THEOLOGYIn light of the usage of the word for dispensation in the New Testament, the term dispensation as it relates to Dispensational Theology could be defined as a particular way of God's administering His rule over the world as He progressively works out His purpose for world historyThere is some disgreement on what these dispensations are thus some say its non biblical wrong it is absoultly Biblical God is not the author of confusion ..Everything he does has a purpose and a set time as we see over and over in scripture. ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF EACH DISPENSATIONIn order for each dispensation to be distinct from all other dispensations, it must have three essential characteristics. 1) FIRST IT MUST HAVE A PARTICULAR WAY OF GOD'S ADMINISTERING HIS RULE Each dispensation is characterized by a unique ruling factor or combination of ruling factors. 2) SECOND IT MUST INVOLVE A PARTICULAR RESPONSIBILITY FOR MANEach dispensation makes man responsible to obey God in accordance with it unique ruling factor or combination of factors. 3) THIRD, IT MUST BE CHARACTERIZED BY DIVINE REVELATION WHICH HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN BEFOREIn order for man to know God's new way of ruling and his new responsibility, he must have these things revealed to him. Each new dispensation requires new revelation from God. 15 4) [Eph 3:2-10]:For example, Paul indicated that the present dispensation is definitely related to new revelation which God gave to the apostles and New Testament prophets: (v. 2) "Surely you have heard about the administration [oikonomian = dispensation] of God's grace that was given to me for you,(v. 3) that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly.(v. 4) In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ,(v. 5) which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets.There are no certain set of believes required to believe in dispensations reguardless of what the Darby types claim There was a dispensation of Law ..but difference in interptation to that Law always existedWe are now in the dispensation of Grace and have been for some 2000 years and there are many doctrineal believes in the world but that doesnt change the fact ... This dispensation is Grace ... Sometimes called the time of the gentile ... it had a beginning and it has an End .... Some try to make doctrines out of the sub catagories of Dispensations or create their own dispensations it is usally these sub Dispensations or made up dispensations men disagree and argue over ... Few Christians I know would argue we are in the Dispensation/under the rule of Grace