Dispensationalism

[marks]

is that you won't see the real promised land as greater than physical Israel and God's Israel as greater than merely ethnic Jews.

I won't?

Or I don't?

God promised a land to Abraham and his descendants, forever, right? He meant it, right? I believe God means what He says and keeps His promises.

Again, you seem to paint me as "less than", that I hold this "little view", as if the actual fulfulment will be some diminuitive. I hold that the restoration of Israel to their land, the estblishment of Jesus' kingdom as He rules from Jerusalem, in Israel, a kingdom of priests, this is not diminished in any sense, it will be amazingly glorious, and the fulfillment of God's plan.

The fact that the meek shall inherit the earth doesn't mean that the promises to Israel aren't what they are, promises for them to have their kingdom as the head of nations.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Hm. Well thanks for the kind words. But you do want me to change my mind and agree with you, right? I mean, that's true of me, too... Well, not that this excuses us for being prideful, but we are yet sinners, after all...

Now that's the interesting question! Not necessarily. You could show me something that may change my mind.

At heart, I think the real exchange is in examining how we read the Bible and reach the conclusions we reach. I champion my view and method, you champion you view and method, and in the process, what I hope to happen is that both of us have opportunity to re-examine our ideas against those other ideas, we have opportunity to see if our method stands up to the test. Maybe you will say something I haven't heard before, or I something new to you, perhaps, who knows?

But if we are both acting in love, that is, seeking the wellbeing of each other . . . yes, I think that I'm offering something good, and I think you feel the same way, but I realize we both have views which we find reasonable and meaningful, so, I'm thinking, share what I think, why I think it, hear what you say, and at the very least, maybe I come to greater understanding of the alternative POV, maybe one or both of us pick up a new idea, I don't know!

But I think there are worse ways I can fill the time, and this way seems good to me.

Much love!

 

[marks]

No, me, too, marks. I think, actually, the prophecies and promises are even more amazing and wonderful than you realize.

I realize that, but I think the real wonder and amazement will be as Israel goes from most persecuted and almost destroyed, then the head of nations in Jesus' kingdom.

These other things, the meek inheriting the earth, these will be also, but that will not diminish the glory of Jesus' kingdom, ruling the earth from Jerusalem with Israel the head of the nations, a kingdom of priests.

Well, you can just look at Revelation 7, which is what we were talking about. I said before, and I'll say again that the group of people in the first half of that chapter, verses 1-8 ~ seemingly 144,000 hard and fast, but that number is symbolic of a complete, complete, completeness, as I said before ~ are the same group of people in the second half, verses 9-17, the innumerable multitude from every tongue, tribe, and nation.

And I have to ask, based on what? They are in different places, different descriptions, so if we go with what it says, they are not. On what basis do you see them the same?

The 144,000 Jewish males are an innumerable multitude from all nations. That makes no sense to me.

but that number is symbolic of a complete

It's a number you can count to. Just like the other numbers I've said. Prophetic numbers, 3 days in the grave, 12 thrones over 12 tribes, 144,000 Jewish males. People say things are symbols, but why? Why not count it as a real number signifying what that number signifies? You don't do this with the other prophecies, why this one?

Not really offended, but apology readily accepted, brother. Or sister...? Well, brother in the androgynous sense, at least...

Grace and peace to you.

Brothers! I'm Mark.

Grace and peace to you also, and much love!

 

[PinSeeker]

Are we literal sheep? Literal goats? Of course not. But that should not be an objection, Jesus Himself said, "as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats". "As" signifies that these terms are in fact meant allegorically, that these are not actual sheep. But if you've ever seen a shepherd divide the herd you'll have the idea of what Jesus is doing with the people.

Oh, my. SIGH. Okay. Marks. I agree with what you say here... Yes, I "have the idea..." But I was making a point to you, concerning what you have said about plain text and allegories and such. It's astounding to me how you can correctly do that here but (seemingly at least) refuse to in other places in the Bible, especially in Revelation, which is so heavily laden from beginning to end and is of the apocalyptic genre of literature, you refuse to do that, and use the "plain reading of the text" meme to justify that.

Israel was chosen from among the other nations, and God made certain promises to that chosen nation. God attached some of those promises to a covenant between Him and that nation. Other promises He had made were simply given to them. Israel's side of that covenant was fulfilled on their behalf by Jesus, and God will fulfill His part when Israel, at a national level, receives Jesus, which will happen when He returns in power and glory, and that kingdom will be established. At that time, all living Israelites will be gathered to the promised land in salvation, to be the head of the nations.

Very much disagree. Yes, that's dispensational, for sure. The Israel of the Old Testament is a foreshadowing of Israel in the New Testament. The latter is the full fleshing out of the former.

The Body of Christ is neither a "new Israel", nor a "spiritual Israel", and is not joined to be a part of ethnic Israel.

Welllll.... <chuckle> Let me restate this.

The Body of Christ is comprised of all God's elect. This is what Paul says in Romans 12:5 ("we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another..."). This is immediately after he has just finished explaining how God will bring (and is bringing) His Israel to completion, so he's directly identifying God's Israel as the Body of Christ. And God's Israel ~ even the Body of Christ ~ will be complete when 1.) all elect Gentiles have been grafted in (Romans 11:19-20) to Israel, 2.) the partial hardening that is on Israel now is removed ~ the ethnic Jewish elect ~ are grafted back in again (Romans 11:24) to God's Israel. This is what Paul says in Romans 11:11-24 ~ which is just prior to Romans 12, you know... ~ and sums it up by saying, "a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in... in this way all Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:25-26).

Jews who in the present day receive Jesus cease to be nationally identified, there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ, and are counted in the body of Christ, in the same way that gentiles coming to God then were counted among Israel.

Well, I mean, I think folks will continue to recognize them as ethnic Jews in this world... My goodness. Again, Paul says in Romans 2:28-29 that "no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical... a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter." Does it not make more sense to you to say that Jews of the letter were never necessarily true Jews in the eyes of God? That's exactly what Paul says in Romans 9:6-8, that "not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but 'Through Isaac shall your offspring be named'... This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring."

Jews when Jesus returns will continue to be nationally identified, again, the head of the nations.

Nope. See immediately above. Marks, I know you know this, but America was responsible for making Israel a physical nation in 1948, not God. Ah, but God made it happen, right? Well sure, He brings all things to pass. I'm not saying that has no significance, and I'm not saying we shouldn't protect the Jews from other folks who are trying to wipe physical Israel from the map or put a stop to such atrocities as the Jewish holocaust back in the early to mid 20th century. But God's Israel is not physical. It never was, and never will be. It is a people, not merely made up of ethnic Jews but people of every tongue, tribe, and nation who confess Jesus as their Lord and Savior. The physical was used by God in Old Testament times as a sort of visual aid ~ it was a lesser foreshadowing the greater reality to come

Hopefully this will clarify how I understand this.

Yes, I have always understood how you understand this. Stop it.

Grace and peace to you, marks.

 

[PinSeeker]

PinSeeker: Yes, that final Judgment is described by Jesus there in Matthew 25:31-33 is most certainly analogous ~ the same event ~ as what is described in Revelation 20:11-12.

I don't see how that can be true, unless you change what Jesus said to mean something other than the normal use of the language He employed. You'd need to be more specific about how you see these the same. I see many differences, that make them entirely different.

Not seeing how what I said is true puts you far out of mainstream Christian thought on this subject, marks. I think I would need to understand the "many differences" you see to address this. I'm not being evasive, but... wow.

Yeah, grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

PinSeeker: Do you discount what happened in 70 A.D.? Because I would say that was the immediate fulfillment of some of the things He said, but not the ultimate fulfillment, which is yet to come.

I compare to the prophecy. Ezekiel prophesied a complete regathering to the promised land, with none left in other nations, and never again to be removed from the land. Has that happened before? I'm not aware of that. Populations have risen and fallen, but that total regathering hasn't happened. Has it?

Well, you say you "compare to the prophecy" here, marks, but which prophecy are you talking about? I was talking about Jesus, not Ezekiel. You're mixing a couple of different things here, to be honest. But, to address what you say about Ezekiel here, as I said before, Ezekiel's prophecy is pre-exilic ~ before the Israelites were taken to Babylon. So the immediate fulfillment of his prophecy was the freeing of the Israelites and their return to the promised land. So, yes, that was quite the regathering... And this is a lesser foreshadowing of the greater fulfillment ~ what will happen at the end of the age, upon Christ's return.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

The kingdom I'm referring to is when Jesus will rule the earth from Jerusalem, Israel as the head of the nations. David will be king of Israel, and the 12 Apostles will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel.

Ugh. Yes, I know what you're referring to. That's the problem.

That kingdom has not happened yet.

Right, and never will, at least not in that sort of way. Like I said, stop it.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[marks]

Not seeing how what I said is true puts you far out of mainstream Christian thought on this subject, marks. I think I would need to understand the "many differences" you see to address this. I'm not being evasive, but... wow.

Yeah, grace and peace to you.

Ugh. Yes, I know what you're referring to. That's the problem.


Right, and never will, at least not in that sort of way. Like I said, stop it.

Grace and peace to you.

I think it's the conclusion of the matter.

I mean, what else did Jesus mean, when He told the disciple that in the regeneration, they would sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes?

I can so a comparison between the judgments if you like.

One happens when Jesus returns, before the the dissolution of of heaven and earth, one after. One is the nations of the earth , one is all the dead. One is followed by a 1000 year kingdom.

I'm sorry, not to change gears here, but I'm really confused about something.

It sounds like you've said these regathering prophecies will be both fulfilled for Isreal at the end of the age, but that they mean something else also, I'm I getting that right?

My question for you is, do you think Jesus will regather Israel to their promised land when He returns, of do you see this wholely regarding something else, and not specifically about the Jews coming back to Israel? Do you know what I'm asking? Is that even a part of the fulfillment as you see it?

Much love!

 

[marks]

(seemingly at least) refuse to

Is this how you see me?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Like I said, stop it.

I can if you like.

Much love!

 

[marks]

AT the end of the day, my theory is proven out once again. Dispensational type views are formed from literal readings, non-dispensational views seem associated with allegorical readings. Not meant to be derogatory, only descriptive.

Much love!

 

[PinSeeker]

...I think the real wonder and amazement will be as Israel goes from most persecuted and almost destroyed, then the head of nations in Jesus' kingdom. These other things, the meek inheriting the earth, these will be also, but that will not diminish the glory of Jesus' kingdom, ruling the earth from Jerusalem with Israel the head of the nations, a kingdom of priests.

marks, there will be no nations in the new heaven and new earth. We ~ the meek, the Israel of God ~ will occupy the true ~ greater ~ promised land, the whole earth. There will be no more sin, and all sorrow and sighing will have fled away.

You know, I'm being a little facetious here, but there actually was some ~ some ~ truth to John Lennon's great song, "Imagine." Yeah, a little, anyway. And we don't have to be dreamers.

And I have to ask, based on what? They are in different places, different descriptions, so if we go with what it says, they are not. On what basis do you see them the same? The 144,000 Jewish males are an innumerable multitude from all nations. That makes no sense to me.

The number 144,000, marks ~ as I said ~ is a symbolic number... it is a number symbolizing the people of God, His Israel, in the new heaven and new earth. And the complete number of the people of God will be innumerable, a multitude as the stars of the heavens, the grains of the seashore, just as God promised Abraham. You can say you think that's nonsense, and that would be your prerogative to do so, but I really don't think you can say with any credibility that "that makes no sense."

It's a number you can count to. Just like the other numbers I've said. Prophetic numbers, 3 days in the grave, 12 thrones over 12 tribes, 144,000 Jewish males. People say things are symbols, but why? Why not count it as a real number signifying what that number signifies? You don't do this with the other prophecies, why this one?

Well because it's correct, that's why. Ah, well, just taking that last question ~ "why this one?" ~ I would turn that around and bring back what we were talking about concerning sheep and goats. You don't think that's woodenly literal in that case, acknowledging that the sheep are actually people whom God is Shepherd of and goats are people who... well, you know... But you see the symbolism there, but why do you reject it here in Revelation, which, again, being apocalyptic in genre, is heavily laden with symbolism throughout?

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

I think it's the conclusion of the matter. I mean, what else did Jesus mean, when He told the disciple that in the regeneration, they would sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes?

Jesus said a mouthful there in Matthew 19, that's for sure...

I can do a comparison between the judgments if you like.

Well okay, But I'm pretty sure I won't "like"...

One happens when Jesus returns, before the the dissolution of of heaven and earth, one after. One is the nations of the earth , one is all the dead. One is followed by a 1000 year kingdom.

Ah, yeah, pre-tribulationism... Yes, I was right:

It sounds like you've said these regathering prophecies will be both fulfilled for Israel at the end of the age, but that they mean something else also, I'm I getting that right?

Well, there's an immediate fulfillment and an ultimate fulfillment of each. Regardless of your agreement or disagreement, I... think I've been very clear about that.

My question for you is, do you think Jesus will regather Israel to their promised land when He returns, of do you see this wholely regarding something else, and not specifically about the Jews coming back to Israel? Do you know what I'm asking? Is that even a part of the fulfillment as you see it?

You mean the immediate, as opposed to the ultimate? Sure. Absolutely. Or, okay, really, that the immediate fulfillments point to, even proclaim the certainty of the coming ultimate fulfillment. The lesser is indicative of the greater. Sure.

AT the end of the day, my theory is proven out once again. Dispensational type views are formed from literal readings, non-dispensational views seem associated with allegorical readings. Not meant to be derogatory, only descriptive.

Far be it from me to deprive you of your opinion. You know, as if I could do that anyway...

Grace and peace to you.

 

[marks]

The number 144,000, marks ~ as I said ~ is a symbolic number... it is a number symbolizing the people of God, His Israel, in the new heaven and new earth. And the complete number of the people of God will be innumerable, a multitude as the stars of the heavens, the grains of the seashore, just as God promised Abraham. You can say you think that's nonsense, and that would be your prerogative to do so, but I really don't think you can say with any credibility that "that makes no sense."

What I'm saying is that this I find no Biblical authority behind this, is all. But in fact, it doesn't make sense to me to not expect these prophecies to be fulfilled as written.

Do you believe Jesus will visibly return in power and great glory to this earth at the end of the age? If so, do you believe that because of the prophecies which foretell this? If so, why do you think these other prophecies won't be fulfilling in the terms give (Captivity of Jacob returned to their land) but that prophecy will be?

Jesus was in the tomb 3 days and 3 nights as prophesied. 144,000 sealed Jewish males as prophesied. Why is one number ordinal, the other not?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Well because it's correct, that's why.

It just is. I don't find that very compelling, when I'm reading Scripture, and I have a mind that what I read is true, though some who is nice, and smart, tells me, actually, it's just not that away. I need some foundation to that.

Much love!

 

[marks]

you don't think that's woodenly literal in that case, acknowledging that the sheep are actually people whom God is Shepherd of and goats are people who... well, you know...

Again, Jesus Himself uses the wording to show the allegorical element . . . As a shepherd . . . this is a similitude, and I can point to the place in the Bible where this is explicitly stated. That's what I look for, this kind of Biblical authority.

"Those aren't really sheep." "How so you know?" "They just aren't, I just know they are not." - or - "because Jesus said so, right there."

We seem to be repeating . . .

Much love!

 

[marks]

especially in Revelation, which is so heavily laden from beginning to end and is of the apocalyptic genre of literature,

I do not consider the Revelation to be Hebrew Apokalyptic Genre. Rather, the Revelation is inspired Scripture, first and foremost, and Hebrew Apokalyptic is not. The Revelation is prophetic vision and prophetic narrative. There is used of symbols, and symbols are identified, and their meaning is identified.

Hebrew Apokalyptic is more like reading Steven King then the Bible. It would be like calling the Gospel of Matthew to be the same genre as the "the Gospel of Thomas", for instance. Written in a way that may sound like Bible, but not Bible in the slightest.

I approach the Revelation in the same way as the rest of Scripture, seeking what it says for itself, including symbols and their meanings. I'm not going to be the one to declare "this is actually that" without the Scriptural authority to do so.

I appreciate the conversation, I'm not sure how much further we can go.

Much love!

 

[Earburner]

If you recognize that the OT sacrifices are ended with Jesus' one time sacrifice, that is a dispensational POV.

Your point of truth is well understood by most here.

 

[Earburner]

Marks said:
If you recognize that the OT sacrifices are ended with Jesus' one time sacrifice, that is a dispensational POV.

Earburner replied:
Your point of truth is well understood by most here.

Marks, I was only agreeing with the point that you were making, in regards to the issue that the OC sacrifices ended, when Jesus' one time sacrifice of Himself took place. That is indeed a separation of dispensations, and in reality is one of only two.
There is a dispensation of God's Law (the Age of Transgression), and now the dispensation of the gospel of God's Mercy (the Age of Grace).
Anything else beyond that is speculation.

Therefore, we we must becareful for whatever else we might want to include or call as being a dispensation, due to our particular view on eschatology.
A particular view in eschatology does not discern a dispensation.
Edit: as to the two dispensations that we know of, I might consider the world of Noah, that it may also be a dispensation. But, since it is a world that we really know nothing about, wherein all was destroyed, except Noah and his family, that world only continued through them, upto God culling out a people through Abraham for His Name's sake, being that of Israel.

 

[marks]

Marks said:
If you recognize that the OT sacrifices are ended with Jesus' one time sacrifice, that is a dispensational POV.

Earburner replied:
Your point of truth is well understood by most here.

Marks, I was only agreeing with the point that you were making, in regards to the issue that the OC sacrifices ended, when Jesus' one time sacrifice of Himself took place. That is indeed a separation of dispensations, and in reality is one of only two.
There is a dispensation of God's Law (the Age of Transgression), and now the dispensation of the gospel of God's Mercy (the Age of Grace).
Anything else beyond that is speculation.

Therefore, we we must becareful for whatever else we might want to include or call as being a dispensation, due to our particular view on eschatology.
A particular view in eschatology does not discern a dispensation.
Edit: as to the two dispensations that we know of, I might consider the world of Noah, that it may also be a dispensation. But, since it is a world that we really know nothing about, wherein all was destroyed, except Noah and his family, that world only continued through them, upto God culling out a people through Abraham for His Name's sake, being that of Israel.

I don't really try to count, or name, various "dispensations", the was some do. But as I see distinctions in the Bible that show dispensational differences, I can realize, that is what I'm seeing.

What I see in the alternative is to have to declare all these parts that don't really mean what they say. But we can accept their sayings knowing that there were in fact different ways God brought man to know Him.

Much love!