Leaving Dispensationalism | Theocast
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- Our listeners have been asking for a podcast about leaving dispensationalism. We try to give the people what they want! Jon and Justin talk about why we are not dispensational. We talk personally and theologically, covering topics such as: the redemptive-historical framework of Scripture, covenant theology, law/gospel distinction, sanctification, and the ordinary means of grace.
Semper Reformanda Podcast: In our first ever Semper Reformanda podcast, we talk more in-depth about the differences between a confessional, reformed perspective and a dispensational perspective. We tell a story or two and share some of the things that we most want our listeners to know.
Resources:
FREE EBOOK Theocast.org/primer
Our podcast: Law/Gospel • Law/Gospel Distinction
Our podcast: Demands of the Gospel? • The Demands of the Gos...
Our podcast: Are You a Legalist or an Antinomian? • Are You a Legalist or ...
Our teaching series: Covenant Theology • Covenant Theology: Int...
SUPPORT Theocast:
theocast.org/g...
FACEBOOK:
Theocast: / theocast.org
TWITTER:
Theocast: / theocast_org
INSTAGRAM:
Theocast: / theocast_org
#covenanttheology #reformedtheology #dispensationalism
My biggest issues with dispensationalism is that it has turned the modern nation of Israel into an idol in the evangelical community. It has provided an excuse for many to not participate in the work to be done on earth.
You are especially talking about the hyper dispensationalist. The idea of reading the Bible as written, without spiritualizing the text is good. But I think you have dismissed the whole idea because some have become too extreme.
@@brianschmidt704 Not at all - I question it on the grounds that it is an enlightenment era theology developed during a time where 'Christian' cult movements were on the rise. It question God's consistency especially in regards to grace where Genesis and Hebrews tells a different story. It maintains the distinction between God's people where Paul states that the distinction is no longer there. It's a distraction at the pop level - those who don't know any better think that this is what the Bible teaches where the covenantal framework is more noticeable.
@mequint2000 Covenant theology was developed by Augustine. It was an attempt to make israel into a footnote and the church be the main point of god's redemptive plan. I see two distinct covenants, With one awesome god over both. The whole purpose of the scripture is to declare god's glory. Part of that glory is to redeem fallen man. But god's glory would continue whether man existed or not.
@@brianschmidt704 You see two distinct covenants when Christ and the apostles backed by Moses and the prophets spoke of one new covenant to supersede the old. Jesus is the Israel, the offspring who inherits the promises God gave to Abraham. Anyone in Him is a new creation, His body manifesting the spiritual Israel, whether Jew or Gentile. So says Scripture. National Israel made up of non-Semites who do not acknowledge the Messiah has come in the flesh is the anti-Christ.
@@sishrac but the land promises to Israel were unconditional. If God could change His mind, then how are we safe? Are you saying that Israel lost all of God's promises?
The biggest danger of dispensationalism is that most dispensationalists don't know they are dispensationalists
This is the same story for so many, including myself. It’s what we were taught and what we learned if you grew up in an evangelical church. When you make a deep study of it yourself with humility, it’s just not there and you can’t unsee what is in the text.
My moms head exploded when she heard me listening to this podcast. Shes a hardcore Baptist. Ever since i was little it seems they have been looking for signs of the rapture and end times. I hate how shes been indoctrinated into thinking that anything esle the differs from her beliefs is the devils way of leading you estray
😂 your not alone!!!
🤣🤣🤣
*_God Bless_*
Jesus said we must come as a child.
@@glendagaskin151 Yes he did, however there is no message of dispensationalism anywhere in Scripture.
A child would never come to that thought by reading the Bible.
Just left dispensationalism. It’s amazing how much richer Scripture is to me through the lens of covenant theology
What are all the covenants in scripture? Is reading the scripture through a lens a good thing? I'd rather let the text speak for itself. Also, what specifically made you leave dispensationalism?
I hold to dispensational premillenialism as well as covenant theology and appreciate contributions from both. I am a 5 point Calvinist, so there I differ from most dispensationalists. I also object to the free grace theology of many dispensationalists, as well as the legalism of others. I very much appreciate the law/gospel distinction and teaching of the active obedience of Christ and the soteriology of the Reformed, but I am a credo baptist and do not hold to Sunday as the sabbath and amillenialism or postmillenialism or the cessation of the nation of Israel in God's future program.
@@ethanrayment8157dispensationalism is a lense as well. So much of it isn't in the text. So ironic how you say " let the text speak for itself".
@@jburghau you surely are mixed up kid.
@@jburghauwhat?! Lol
I am brand new to Covenant theology. I've followed dispensationalist preachers and the churches I've been in are dispensationalism or they don't have a stance. I'm 61 been in the church all my life and wasn't aware of CT. how did I miss this?....now attending a 1689 Baptist church. Devouring your videos. Thanks
Is that Calvinist ?
@@canadiankewldude Yes
ohh, such an ancient venerable church - indeed, bro, exceptional - but you could do much better....
I'm grateful that you found a new road to travel on. The dispensational path is leading believers into a never never land. Please check out Jeff Durban and Apologia studios. It's very good!!!!!!!
You should do an episode on the origins of dispensationalism, pre-Darby. People need to know.
Grew up in Macarthur’s church, learned about post mil theology and became NCT, then I officially transitioned into 1689 Reformed Baptist theology.
Is that Calvinist ?
@@canadiankewldude Yes
What is the difference between NCT and 1689 Reformed? Or is that a long answer
@@jsong8282new covenant theology vs covenant theology
Out of the frying pan into the fire.
I’ve a very controversial question that I know it may make many to feel uncomfortable in their skin! But it’s a question and I’ve to get it out of my chest and find a answer for it. Remember that this question has nothing to do with antisemitism, it’s just a question about the theological views that impacts the world.
Question: how much dispensational movement and world view played role or impacted the rebuild of the country of Israel in the 20th century, directly or indirectly?!
Dispensationalism didn't rebuild the Nation of Israel. The satanic kingdom rebuilt it.
It has nothing to do with antisemitism to recognize that God's word is inevitable. Israel (the kingdom of heaven) will rise out of the ashes of the synagogue of Satan ( the state of Israel, Vatican, United Nations, Washington DC, London, Swiss banks, Hollywood, etc) mystery Babylon.
The Lord will preserve what is His and dip his robes in the blood of all the rest. Nobody can contend with that and the information is there for our understanding but it's not our primary concern. Our primary concern is supposed to be the gospel. Plain and simple.
That's a dang good question
Directly and intentionally....SMH
All of it! Zionism is a big part of dispensationalism.
All of it is Zionism? What if it flowed that way because it was God moving to fulfill scriptures? If the dispensationalist movement is true then of course it would help scriptures and prophecies come true as this is Gods will. Let me ask you this , what other nation that was conquered and spread all over the earth maintained their identity and where not assimilated into the culture they landed in. The Jews coming back to Israel after 2000 years is a sign of Gods involvement. Period.
The hyper fixation on Israel in dispensationalism concerns me for political reasons as well as the neglect of the present moment to basically divinate for an idol, in my opinion. Christian tarot.
4:37 - introduction & Dispensationalism background
7:06 - Jon talks about his training at Dispensational Masters Seminary
9:23 - difference between CT & Dispensationalism
11:45 - Human authorial intent e.g. Moses, Jeremiah & the Ultimate Authorial Intent of God, 1 big Story
17:00 Christo centric vs moralistic hermeneutic, shadows, Israel centric hermeneutic, NT interprets OT
20:00 - 3 major covenants, "Trinity" as a word is not in Scripture,Biblicism,
23:35 - allow the NT interpret OT, open theism,
24:50 - Dispensationalists openly disagree with CT Framework. Dispensationalism is a Framework of 7 Dispensations, Schofield study bible
28:30 - Israel is the centre?, is the Church the parenthesis? Rapture?
32:44 Law & Gospel distinction- this was so good. Legalism, antinomianism, John MacArthur Hard to believe books beating up readers, covenant of works, demands in Gospel? 3 uses of the Law in Dispensationalism, Gospel according to Jesus, RICH Young Ruler is a Law passage or a Gospel passage?
40:00 - sanctification is synergistic or monergistic? How do we grow in grace? Sacraments
If you use colons : vs periods . your timestamps become clickable ⏱4:37 7:06 9:23 11:45 etc
So helpful!!
Dispensations are just periods in time where God chose how to move. The time of Adam and Eve was completely different from Abraham's time, Abraham's time was completely different from Moses and Moses time completely different from the time of the Church. The church time will be completely different from the tribulation and 1000 year reign. I'm so confused how one would not see this. Am I missing something?
🎯
You make a great point.
@sharice
I Like your simple comment, I feel the same way.
Furthermore I think it is strange, how people criticizing Disp. say that it is something new, when in fact, Paul wrote about it again and again. Many say Paul had no different message than the 12, and others say he is a false apostle and should not even be in the Bible. That does not make any sense... For me it is so clear to see, how God had a plan from the beginning for Heaven AND Earth and how Israel plays the special role for the program of reconciliation on Earth while we in the Body of Christ are going to serve in Heaven for His glory. Peace and Grace to all brethren
When you say God chose to move in different ways throughout history, isn't that opposed to Romans 4:3?
"Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness."
So we see then, that throughout all of history man was justified by grace, through faith as a gift of God, and not by works of the law so that no man may boast (Hebrews 2:8-9).
Was the Law worthless then? Not at all, it was upheld by faith! (Romans 3:31)
If Abraham's belief was counted unto him for righteousness, and we are also justified by Grace through faith, then how can it be said that the natural seed of Abraham will reign on Earth while the gentiles reign in heaven, or that Israelites and Gentile believers have different missions or paths to salvation? But in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Gentile (Galations 3:28), and us gentiles have been grafted in to the true vine (Romans 11:17b), which is not Israel, but Christ (John 15:1-7).
What are we to make of the Israelites then? They have not been rejected (Romans 11:1-6), but those who believed have been saved while the rest have had their hearts hardened (Romans 11:7-8).
By ministering to them, rather then leaving them as if God has a different plan for them then the Gentiles, we can make them jealous of the grace shown to us by God (Romans 10:19), and therefore they will turn back to God, showing that even their disobedience was planned so that God could show his great mercy (Romans 11:32).
The danger in dispensationalism is that it disguises hatred as love, by encouraging it's adherents to not worship to the Jews. We are instead called to love and witness to them.
@etheretherether I don't mean God changed the way salvation works. Faith has always been the standard. Dispensations doesn't push the Isrealites to the side. Jesus's command was to go into all nations. That doesn't exclude Isreal. God moved differently but His standard of obtaining his mercy has never changed. We don't see God walking in the garden in the cool of the day with us in this age, we don't have him sending mass floods or raining down fire and sulfur balls and we certainly don't have annual sacrifices anymore. This age is different from other ages. God is still the same God and still required faith through all ages though.
This discussion was very helpful. Thank you for making it so simple, with such a loving tone. I really appreciated it!
Thanks for sharing!
Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, modern Dispensational Theology falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.
@@SpotterVideo *_God Bless_*
do you like being initiated into confusing God with a Moloch-god??
@@silveriorebelo2920deep rebuttal
Keep up the great work guys and may many come out of this unhelpful system of beliefs and see that a Christ- centered , redemptive historical narrative is totally biblcal ;) to God be the glory
Thanks!
I just read through the Bible, OT once a year, Epst. & Rev. twice a year, Gspl. & Acts 3 times a year. I see good things in Reformed Theology, see good things in Dispensational Theology, see good things in Baptist Theology, I've been reading the Augsburg Confession lately, good stuff there too. I test all of it by the Bible, The Word of God, here I stand I can do no other.
Hi, on the opposite, sanctification used to focus on monergism in dispensationalism because of antinomianism. My research thesis was exactly about that. On the other hand, in covenant theology, some perspectives focus on synergism, while others in monergism.
If we analyze exegetically sanctification, it is participative (God and man), progressive, and focus on synergism. I am a theologian with a the New Covenant perspective. It is hard to explain everything here, but you can study more about both perspectives as you did, analyzing and comparing sanctification with both perspectives in a deeply and exegetical way. Just as it took time for you to realize that Dispensationalism has many mistakes, it can take time to realize what is exactly sanctification biblically and theologically. At the end, you understand why synergism is according to God’s Word.
Thank you for the podcast!
17 mins in and I respect your approach, but I have to disagree that dispensationalists don’t think Christ is at the center of everything. We just don’t think his earthly ministry is the center of everything, we take each verses as the spoken (written) word of God which is spoken by Jesus.
I believe Jesus can reveal things progressively through prophets etc not simply when he is on the flesh on earth.
One of Ligonier's recent youtube videos had Dr. W. Robert Godfrey answering the question " What is the greatest difference between Reformed theology and non-Reformed theology?"
One man left a comment that the greatest difference was the Reformed had not " reformed" their eschatology. In my interaction with him, everything revolved around Israel.
He had graduated from DTS. I was just " vomiting" out what I had been led to believe. ( I am Orthodox Presbyterian.)
He used the phrase " Palestinian covenant." When I replied the Bible does not have a "Palestinian covenant," I was told I had not been " formally educated." Deut. does have a land covenant........which is part of the Abrahamic covenant. That small portion of Middle Eastern land ( Promised land) was a shadow that pointed to the new heavens and new earth. Dr. R. Scott Clark, Westminster Seminary, CA.......Abraham is not Moses.
How would I get saved under covenant theology?
Dispensationalism is political Israel-based prophecy whereas covenant theology is Jesus-based prophecy.
How true!
I'm a French pastor, born Brazilian. I grew up in a very dispensationalist Church and went to a Bible College that had the same vision of my Church. I became a slave to it and taught it more than I preched the gospel. On my way to Africa, over 30 years ago where I was a missionary, I met a person in Belgium who told me what you're doing here. I starded reading the Bible in a different way. I've been serving God for 25 years in France and I believe that one of the causes of division in the French Church today is the theology concerning the place of the acctual nation of Israel in God's economy. People have recently left our Church because we dont't believe Israel is the bride of the Lamb and the Church is God's comcubine. Would you pray for us?
I am Catholic abd bought into dispensationalism, read the Left Behind books and movies. My mom Catholic thought I was nuts. Come to find out, rapture is brand new and did not start till the 1800s. I was really obscessed with end times! No more!
Good for you sis.
God bless you ❤
Neato! Do you guys have any videos in spanish or can recommend a channel in spanish with a similar understanding?
Regarding us not doing this stuff alone, how we must gather etc. What about someone disabled and unable to leave the house, with no vehicle to get to fellowship with other Christians? What about solitary monks in history?
Do you believe in the FINISHED work of our Lord Jesus Christ for salvation?
I agree with everything you said. After I was saved I went to a dispensational Baptist church for a long time.
I have come around to reformed theology. The one thing I didn't understand is your view of sanctification.
Don't I take part in that by the choices I make? I still have the desires of the flesh and the desire of righteousness.
I choose between the two. If I choose not to read my bible, isn't that on me? (for example)
I’m still so confused 😢😢😢 I used to be word of faith prosperity ugh then God opened my eyes and I guess I have been a dispensationalist Now ugh 😩 I just want to be with Jesus. I talk with Him all day everyday out loud. I read His word everyday but am I wrong in my thinking
It's dispensationalism that makes people confused.
I was dispensationalist for twenty years and left the doctrine ten years ago. I now view dispensationalism as a virus that messes up the entire operating system.
The Bible is pretty basic. Israel used to be God's covenant people but not everyone in Israel was saved. Only those who had faith were saved.
The land promise was conditional and the law was the condition. However, the land promise was just a type and shadow of a much better promise, (Heb 8 6) eternal life on a restored Earth.
The New Covenant was promised to Israel (Jer 31 31) but it was actually promised to whoever would believe in Jesus (Jn 3 16)
Now there is no difference between Jew and Gentile.
Nothing wrong. Dont let others settle you into confusion.
Keep going in your walk with the Lord. Glad to hear u have come out of the empty/shallowness of mammon oriented/centred prosperity gospel.
Ditto on your remarks
Keep your focus on Christ and let your faith lead you. Choose not to be confused and seek outside confirmation. Don’t be a man pleaser continue to accept his grace love and hope as your personal relationship.
Stephanie, these guys don’t understand dispensational doctrine as much as they think they do. And they know nothing about Right Division. I was a word of faith person for over 30 years. Right Division set me straight. Here is a video of my testimony… ruclips.net/video/fmSy33zwNf0/видео.htmlsi=5ECRXhYX_LPX2lVn
Jack Hyles. Wow, that's a blast from the past. I worked at the Hammond Public Library, right down the street from Hammond Baptist. They had quite the reputation.
A REPUTATION IS NICE WORD FOR WHAT JACK HYLES WAS PRACTICING. HE DID LEAVE HIS MARK ON THE CHRISTIAN WORLD THAT'S FOR SURE. AND IT WASN'T GOOD.
The entire ifb movement has left a negative mark.
What about the mystery of the church? Not found in prophecy.
I have no idea what you guys were attempting to say.
How can you dismiss the scripture on the rapture? Just curious not being judgmental.
There are no scripture of the "rapture". They all relate to the second coming.
We interpret it as the Saints gathering with Jesus to welcome Him back to the Earth
Colossians 3:4 KJV - When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.
This "rapture" vs says nothing about the earth. The rapture puts believers with Christ in glory, not on the earth.
How did the church interpret the passages before the rapture theory ??
@@bigtobacco1098probably the same way they interpreted Titus 2:13, “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;”
Wow you came out of the IFB! (Ex ifb here, love your guys podcast!)
Really appreciate this podcast. Ive been trying to really work out the differences between covenantal and dispensational viewpoints and this was so clear and simply explained. Thank you
I find ALL these systems, and labels counterintuitive to understanding the scripture. They all look beautiful and perfect when they are asserted but all have places where they fail, or as Mike Heiser puts it, have to "cheat" and twist the scripture to fit support the system. I appreciate Dr. Heiser's approach to scripture which encourages us to set aside systems and labels and come to the bible on its own terms. As long as you are coming to it through ANY theological framework, or worried about fitting yourselfninto one of these categorical labels, you are bringing bias to the text. We all need to recognize our bias and set it aside. Be a "slave" to the text, don't make the text a slave to your system. The Naked Bible Podcast is a great place to go to understand what that looks like.
He was a very different bible student: aiming to stick to scripture even when it challenged time-worn traditions and systems. I disagree with certain of his conclusions, but always respected Mike's rigorous approach to the text.
Dr Michael Heiser RIP
I agree. That is my core problem with covenant theology. It views the entire scripture through a lens of seeing everything as god's redemptive story. That story is there but that's not the whole story. Let scripture interpret scripture, And avoid trying to put your spin on anything.
@@brianschmidt704 I agree with your take on Covenant theology. Many moons ago, I attended a covenantal reformed church: week after week, their attempts at doctrinal harmonization began to feel like heroic efforts to square the circle.
Are you dispensational? I sort of am, but not in any traditional way. I see the same basic distinctions they do and, by rightly dividing, I draw many of the same lines. But then we go our separate ways.
I would agree with nearly everything stated here, but I do believe that your representation of the Israel/Church distinction lacks some clarity. In my opinion, the entirety of Scripture is concerned with Israel's eschatology. It was ALWAYS about Israel and its place in God's redemptive-historical plan. What is missing here is an understanding that Israel only changed in form, from a physical, ethnic entity into a spiritual entity as Paul describes in Romans 9 and 10. The Church is the True Israel, but in a spiritual sense. It was ALWAYS about Israel and the ending of God's redemptive plan. The two main covenants that we espouse really describe the transition from the Mosaic order of types and shadows into a spiritual administration. Most of the New Testament gives evidence of this. That is what Dispensationalists miss: that the Church IS (and will always be) the True Israel. The events of AD 70 comprised the vindication of all that Jesus professed and professed to be, and put an end to the types and shadows of what was always a spiritual promise, one that could only be known by the Spirit. They don't understand that the promises made to Abraham were only types and shadows of what were always spiritual promises. They are still looking for a return to the land instead of understanding "the land" as only a type representing the spiritual promise of an eternity of peace and fellowship.
Exactly, at some point the Church has to come to understand that's it's the spiritual Israel. "Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, ‘Thus says the LORD, the God of the Hebrews, “Let my people go, that they may serve me."
Who is really teaching “Replacement Theology” ?
(Did God fulfill His promises to the Jewish people at Calvary? Matthew 26:28, John 19:30)
The advocates of modern Dispensational Theology often accuse others of promoting “Replacement Theology”, or some may even say “Antisemitism”. What does the Bible say about their accusations?
1. Who is replacing Christ as the seed of Abraham through which all the families of the Earth would be blessed in Genesis 12:3, with Abraham’s modern descendants?
2. Who is replacing the one people of God in John 10:16, with two peoples of God ?
3. Who is replacing the one seed (Christ) in Galatians 3:16, with the many seeds?
4. Who is replacing the children of the promise in Romans 9:8, with the children of the flesh?
5. Who is replacing the faithful “remnant” of Israelites in Romans 11:1-5, with the Baal worshipers?
6. Who is replacing the word "so" in Romans 11:26, with the word "then"?
7. Who is attempting to replace the Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles? Why did Peter address the crowd as “all the house of Israel” in Acts 2:36, when about 3,000 Israelites accepted Christ on the Day of Pentecost?
8. Based on Hebrews 9:15, the New Covenant cannot be separated from the Messiah’s death. Is the covenant in Daniel 9:27 connected to the Messiah’s death in Daniel 9:26. Is the covenant with the “many” in Daniel 9:27 the same covenant with the “many” in Matthew 26:28? If it is, some have replaced the New Covenant in Daniel 9:27 with a future covenant made by an antichrist not found in Daniel chapter 9. (See the 1599 Geneva Bible used by the Pilgrims.)
9. Those promoting the Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology often accuse others of teaching “Replacement Theology”, but are they the masters of it? Are they promoting a form of Dual Covenant Theology based on race? (See “genealogies” in Titus 3:9)
10. Watch the RUclips video “Genesis of Dispensational Theology” to see the origin of this man-made doctrine, which is less than 200 years old. It was brought to the United States about the time of the Civil War by John Nelson Darby. The doctrine was later incorporated into the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, and then spread through much of the modern Church.
Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas Texas was created in part to promote John Darby’s Two Peoples of God doctrine of Dispensational Theology.
Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church:
“The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.”
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107.
Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.”
Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323.
John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated…
"...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.”
John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are there two peoples of God in John 10:16? (See also 1 John 2:22-23, 2 John 1:7-11.)
What is the land promise to the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16?
Based on 2 Peter 3:10-13, is this earth “eternal”? Will it be replaced by a new earth?
Based on Acts 2:36, and Romans 9:6-8, and Romans 11:1-5, and Hebrews 12:22-24, and James 1:1-3, can faithful Israel and the Church be separated into two different groups?
Who is the New Covenant promised to in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and Hebrews 8:6-13?
Will modern Orthodox Jews ever be saved outside of the New Covenant Church?
Amen to this!
Okay, thanks for your notes.
Good warning alerts. Easier to follow i find.
Agree with u that we must take care to discern if one is teaching Judaism or that way leaning in such ways to blur the truth. In the Lord Jesus Christ only, hangs the whole gospel of our good news salvation.
14:43 Can you please direct me to specific scripture that talks about God recieving varying degrees of glory? Especially if there is one that states that any one thing gives him more glory than any other thing. Thank you in advance. I enjoyed your video, but have a few questions. Also, previous to 14:43 it was stated that there was a promise made by God in Genesis 3 to restore mankind. I do believe that the seed of the woman who bruises the head of the serpent is Jesus Christ, and that it was largly fulfilled by his resurrection from the dead, but that was not a promise of redemption made to Adam or Eve. Rather it was given in the curse to the serpent. Please let me know your thoughts. It seems that our knowledge of what eventually took place is being read back into the text instead of allowing the text to mean what it says at the time that it was said.
The Bible is simplistic in its content. Jesus fulfilled and we just lean on His truth.
My issue with the dismissal of dis is that I don't see disagreement as heresy, but as a risk. How do you read great falling away with many false teachers without concern of what happens near the end days.
Yeah, I don't get that these bros. even wanna talk too much about Eschatology.
Problem is, Dispensational Futurist Eschatology is a SYSTEM.
That's why Christians are drawn to it.
In order to refute it, one has to refute it in a Systematic way.
*Soli Deo Gloria*
The great falling away
Is a great falling away from the faith (possibly already started as some ministrts have deconstructed / strayed away now especially since the 6coloured rainbow flag became a thing and they're considering the craftily crafted coexistence demand to defection unto the 1 world peace religion of the pope's or the antichrist to come), or maybe if u like, something still worse to come with a single final "The" Grand Deception blow preceding the Great Tribulation unto the Day of the Lord.
How did theology go from the genuineness of St Maximus the Confessor to dispensationalism
If John Macarthur seriously teaches what you claim then he is in serious error.
You are absolutely right, What happens when a pastor or seminary is invested to far into the system it is very difficult to draw back from it, because your livelihood is dependent on it so many don't have the honesty or humility to say I was wrong. Here is a notable Pastor from the Dominican Republic Sugel Michelin who publicly admitted he was wrong.
Dispensationalism is a man made idea who’s only rationale for existing is to encourage Christians to support Christ Rejecting Israel. If it’s inventors had their way, that support (some say worship) would necessarily exclude Jesus. Enjoyed the presentation.
The original source of the doctrine is found below.
Genesis of Dispensational Theology
ruclips.net/video/Ee4RS5pDntQ/видео.html
Wrong. Let me ask you a question. How do you interpret Ezekiel 36, especially in light of 70 a.d. and 1948?
@@ethanrayment8157 Here’s how I interpret it “But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Matt 8-12
Dispensational theology is the only true way of dividing the Word of God with any sort of accuracy. Most preachers and teachers go Willy Nilly through the Bible pickings scriptures to fit their Sermons or Theology and steal promises away from Israel to fit the Church when in fact the Apostle Paul has plainly stated for anyone who cares to look that the God of Heaven is not finished with the State of Israel but has put them in a time out until the age of Grace is complete. And that Christ Jesus will judge the world according to Paul Gospel. NOT JESUS GOSPEL BUT PAUL GOSPEL. JESUS AND THE LITTLE FLOCK WAS TOTHE NATION ISRAEL. AND PAUL WAS SENT TO THE GENTILES.TWO DIFFERENT GOSPELS. ONE OF WORKS =ISRAEL AND ONE OF GRACE=GENTILES. THE ONE UNDER GRACE NO WORKS OF ANY KIND REQUIRED THAT INCLUDES LAW. WE WHO ARE IN CHRIST ARE THE BODY OF CHRIST IN THE PHYSICAL EARTH TODAY. A NEW CREATION NEVER BEFORE HEARD OF UNTIL THE ASCENSION OF CHRIST. GOD THE FATHER KEPT IT SECRET FOR THE DEVIL. OTHER WISE THEY WOULD HAVE NEVER CRUCIFIED OUR SAVIOR AND WE WOULD STILL BE IN OUR SINS GOING TO HELL. TODAY THE CHURCHES HAVE BECOME APOSTATE. BELIEVING IN ENTERTAINMENT AND SMOOTH THINGS INSTEAD OF SALVATIONAL MESSAGES. SORRY FOR THE CAPS GODS BLESSINGS
You are so right.
Was taught dispensationalism for 35 years. Revelation never made sense, nor did Daniel's 70th week, etc. Once I was exposed to partial preterism, Revelation and the entire Bible finally all made sense.
Can you please discuss definitive sanctification vs. progressive sanctification, salvific vs. ongoing? it seems like you're saying there's only one aspect. And isn't this synergistic sanctification? Paul is working, or is he not actually working it's 100% God's doing? The saint doesn't fight he's only acted up on by God?:
But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me.
Re prayer in 44.44 The Lord's Prayer is explicitly aimed at the individual's own prayer life. No problem with it being used in corporate worship, but it is definitely part of an individual's own actions.
I grew up in the Baptist Church, I never heard dispensation and I’m going to my Lawyer to straighten me out because I have no ideal what you all are saying I’m confused
Guess I'll remain hopelessly between both views, taking the best of each as long as they align with Scripture. I just don't see both as exclusive of each other.
The things is the bible has multiple covenants but also dispensations. As the bible describes, it's just God dealing with specific people in different points of time in different ways but with one overarching theme and plan and person orchestrating it all.
Same. Like I don't see the big division tbh. "Like one is damned and the other isn't". I just don't see the problem.
How does a person survive in a church they are faithful to but is dispensational?
Matthew 8:19 And a certain scribe came, and said unto him, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
Matthew 8:20 And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
Thanks Theobros for this episode.
Regardless of anyones position on "D" I found more hatefull things directed at my honest questions regarding it's theology and origin from Disp. People and preachers than anyone else in my life.
My journey out was very long. I spent most of my life well into my 50s in the Baptistic-Arminio-Dispy world. During all these years I was troubled by how poorly what I was being taught fit with what I was seeing in the scripture. Gradually through God's grace all of that has fallen away and I would characterize myself as a classic Presbyterian including the Doctrines of Grace, Covenant Baptism, and Post Mil eschatology (in that order).
In the later subject I recognized very early that modern Dispensational eschatology clearly couldn't be correct. So I spent a fair amount of time in a vaguely A mil realm lightly held and eventually understood an optimistic Post mil to be the most consistent with the overall arc of scripture.
The biggest problem with dispensationalism is the division of history into distinct time periods. These time periods, or so-called dispensations, are the basis of the inventor John Nelson Darby's claim that people were saved in different ways (emphasis) at different times, which is a contradiction of the Scriptures that indicate that nothing ever pleased God except faith. (Hebrews 11:6)
so you think John the baptist that was beheaded before atonement took place was covered by the blood of Christ that hasn't been shed yet ? the disciples didnt even know what christ meant by rise the third day so you think they were teaching the death burial and resurrection apart from ourselves before the death burial and resurrection took place!!?????
The only thing I can do is urge you to believe the Apostle's words and abandon the nonsense of Darby and Scofield. The internet is filled with explanations about dispensationalism that can help you see a greater light and experience a real sense of liberation and the true purpose of christianity. We are not waiting for any antichrist. We are waiting for the King Of Kings!
@@randylplampin1326 no one cares about Darby or Scofield ,, we stand on Pauls word his mystery revelations from christ, Paul is our pattern for the body of christ!! not peter James and the rest , they were ministers to the circumcision !
2 Tim 1:11
Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.
Paul is the only one with the title apostle of the gentiles!!
Romans 11:13
For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
us gentiles didnt have hope we were strangers from the covenants and commonwealth of Israel until the body of christ mystery was revealed to Paul, and he was converted to a believer in acts 9 the mysteries were still hid in God until he revealed them to Paul after his conversion.
Ephesians 2:11-12
Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
Ephesians 3:1-6
For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, 2If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: 3How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
Ephesians 3:9
And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
Romans 16:25
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
Gal1:11-12
But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Gal 2:2
And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles,
Gal 2:7-9 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; 8(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) 9And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
all Paul's words! not Darby's not Scofield's but Paul's!!!!
Jesus said nothing about faith to the rich young ruler.
Matthew 19:17 KJV - And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
It never occured to me that Matthew 19:17 would undo and turn Hebrews 11:6 into a lie.
I can’t stop watching your videos! Already read your book. 😂
So, no more mentioning the "Time of the Gentiles" or the "Time of Jacob's trouble" or any specific era?
Is it imperative to read the text with a 'theological framework lens' as you suggest? For example, through a meta lens called 'redemption.'
Everyone has a lens...
I have not heard that dispensationalist believe to be a two ways to be saved, is always saved by faith, regardless if you are a Jew or Gentile. How do you explain away Rom 11 ? OT promises have not " transferred " to the Church from Israel have they? I really have a hard time even to understand where you guys come from with your own view, for me I was not born in US or in a Christian family, or taught any bible courses since I did not really care about Christianity. But a plain reading of the Bible is clear that Israel is here to stay regardless if is in her land or not. But like I said before I am grateful that your down to earth tone is easier to listen than someone like Doug Wilson or Joel Webbon who would call someone like me a heretic.
(1 Co 9:17) For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
(Eph 1:10) That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
(Eph 3:2) If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
(Col 1:25) Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
That’s what I love about dispensationalism is they separate the law and the gospel because the two can’t mix.
Which isnt the main point. They separate Israel from the church which is the point.
@@TheJpep2424 yup that as well is separate but if you don’t believe in a pre trib rapture then your view makes sense
@@TheJpep2424Paul separated Israel from the church in Romans 9 10 and 11. Israel is a theocratic nation. The church is not.
Israel is a place on the map. The church is not. There's a culture that has endured for 2000 years that still thinks it's Israel.
Reality and stuff!
Replacement theology is a stretch but so is it's father Calvinism.
Jesus separated Israel from the church.
Paul said it best when he said that the law is the schoolmaster that brings us to the cross.
40:55 Does Phil.2:12 say "observe out your salvation with fear and trembling?"
Dr. Paul Felter is the most informative dispensationalist.
He is very good.
So are you telling me that Covenant people don't believe in the rapture?
I see dispensationalism as the theology of the Industrial Revolution. I do think it's brought some value as it relates to the Churches view of Israel. It had been fairly negative before. But in the end, it's shallow and lacks depth. Christianity was never about the rapture, or living in the future. It's just a selfish idea. Christianity, and the Gospel, has always been about helping fallen people in a fallen world, and having faith in Christ victory over the world. When you dig into scripture, dispensationalism falls apart. I do think this is understandable. It's only since the 1500's people have had access to printing, reading, writing. And only in the last 100 years people have had access to freedom, travel, technology, advanced scholarship. Then you add in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and people's understanding of the Word of God is really only now coming into fullness.
It's disturbing when a preacher dismisses the Old Testament as irrelevant and yet it's full of Christ in types and shadows, The Holy Spirit reveals Christ to us in the scriptures.
What is Lordship salvation? I've heard this but don't understand the meaning.
Perhaps in a year’s time you have already found the answer elsewhere, but I’ll shoot anyway: the lordship salvation controversy was born from the dispensational hermeneutic that makes distinctions between things. It comes from a faulty interpretation of what is meant by ”rightly divide” scripture. Instead of ”teach correctly” it means ”categorize correctly”. In this case it was a distinction between ”lord” and ”savior” - Jesus being one but not the other. It was dispensationalist Zane Hodges who advocated that one could be saved with Jesus being only their savior but not their lord. John MacArthur countered this with the book ”The Gospel According to Jesus”. The whole controversy would not exist without dispensationalism, so the book as a remedy is totally irrelevant to all but those in the dispensational camp who find Hodges’ take compelling. Hope this helps.
Best I can tell, Covenant Theology is about the actual seed, Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:28), whereas Dispensationalism regards that seed as referring to all the descendants of Abraham. God's chosen people have always been true Believers... the "remnant".... Isaac, but not Ishmael; Jacob, but not Esau; Ruth and Rahab, despite not being Abraham's descendants. Recall Elijah's lament that he had failed to bring Israel to repentance/return to God and thought he was alone, but then was relieved/encouraged when informed that there were still 7000 who had not bowed the knee to Baal. The importance of genealogy was to point to Jesus as Messiah according to prophecy. Once He "arrived", genealogy's usefulness was complete, ie, genealogy no longer had a purpose after confirmation of the prophesied Messiah.
Well you said it, "give the people what they want". Itching ears.
Actually, the mention of dispensationalism is found in the first 50 years of the Ancient Antiochene church of God. I challenge you to read and find out.
I found after all the yrs I've intentionally studied the Holy Book of books the book of Isaiah God Speaks for Himself. He covers so Very much.
JulieKilburn
"Well hath Esaias prophesied"
Mrk7:6
I love that line from Jesus.
Isaiah is such a GREAT book.
I support covenant theology but of the three covenants you mentioned only 1 is actually clearly defined in scripture and you are reading the other two into scripture. What about the covenant with Noah, Moses, David? What about those? Those are the actual covenants of covenant theology that God honors because those are the ones God actually made.
We are gods workmanship. It is not of ourselves.
Theocast might have left formal Dispensationalism, but their way of teaching is dangerously close to Dispensational _Free Grace_
For example, things Justin has said: "if you are not being accused of antinomianism, you are not preaching Grace hard enough.", well...just because Paul was accused of that does not mean we should all model our teaching to eliminate the consequences of true saving faith.
A good old Reformed pastor once told me: "you are preaching a good message when people leave the service knowing the infinite Grace and love from God towards His children, while having a clear conviction of sin and the potential consequences of it"
Why is it important to be clear on both sides?
1. Because if you *just* emphasize law and sin, you are removing Grace, and that leads to legalism (Lordship Salvation - Dispensational)
2. If you *just* emphasize Grace, you remove the fruit of the Spirit and end up leading to antinomianism (Free Grace - Dispensational)
I use to be a Dispy, till I came to Sam Storms, Riddlebarger, Beale, Schreiner.
I lean towards Covenant theology, but from a 1689 Baptist perspective.
Jon and Justin are both 1689!
Not labeling things doesn't make you any more or less righteous, and it doesn't eliminate the fact that what is labeled theologically as a dispensation, it doesn't change the reality of what that particular providential work God's sovereign will is accomplishing, it's still a dispensation.
Worked, for the time it worked for the purpose it needed to work to accomplish God's will, the only people I have found historically that have a problem with dispensations, are people who are little fruit juicy in their theology.
Reminder selves, it's not our gospel it's jesus's, if we submit to him, then his rule and his standards have not changed - the other submit or or go do something else, there's no grey area.
Good stuff, but I have nowhere heard this definition of ”biblicism” before. How official is this, for lack of a better word?
I AM A DISPENSATIONALIST born and bred in dispensationalism. come from a Southern Baptist Denomination in the south. Preacher was dispensational in all his understanding of the KJV Scofield Reference Bible. Went to Ruckman U where if you were not dispensational, you were un-saved period. I LIKE THAT ALOT. I STUDIED REFORMED THEOLOGY AND CALVINISM. Was almost a believer in CALVINS theories of theology but found them to be more philosophical than theological. If a believer has not been trained to divide the Word of God with accuracy as they teach in Dispensationalism, then you become a Calvinist. The Theology of Calvinism or Reform Theology is way to Catholic for my bones. My mother was a Presbyterian and so was the rest of my uncles and aunts. my parents married and became Southern Baptists. I don't really believe she ever understood Dispensational theology OR AS I LIKE TO CALL IT REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY. MAKING THE CHURCH SPIRITUAL ISRAEL WOW. PLUM WRONG. BUT I DO LIKE TO HEAR FROM TIME -TO- TIME WHAT OTHER BELIEVERS BELIEVE. I DO NOT JUDGE A PERSON SALVATION ON BELIEF SYSTEMS BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY. BUT ON WHO JESUS CHIST IS IN YOUR LIFE. WELL, THAT'S MY COMMENTARY GOD'S BLESSINGS
Thank you for your input. Just to clarify, are you saying dispensationalism is replacement theology? That is the opposite of what it teaches. Dispensationalism teaches that the church does not replace, supercede, or subsume Israel. All Israel is saved at the return of Christ, and the nation of Israel has the preeminent role among the nations during the Millennium. I am a dispensational Premillenialist and credo Baptist who is a member of a Bible Presbyterian church because it is the best church in my neighborhood. I hold to the Westminister confession for the most part, but I see the Bible supporting the eschatology of dispensationalism. I appreciate so much Theocast and Heidelblog but I disagree with their eschatology. (And Heidelblog 's infant baptism.)
@@jburghau Yeah, I caught that, too.
But, he is wrong.
The proper interpretation of Rev. 12 will clear up the whole "who is real, Israel?," issue.
Kinda like Paul does in Ephesians 2.
*Soli Deo Gloria*
Unteachable
“I am undone” that is what the Law was intended to produce, so that God takes the coal (the Holy Spirit) and touches our mouth and purges our sin. Am I stretching?
Jesus said. I WILL KEEP YOU FROM THE GREAT TRIBULATION THAT WILL BE ON THE WHOLE WORLD. That’s good enough for me.
I challenge you to quote a verse where Jesus says that
@sandyhancock2020 I believe she is refferring to revaltion "Because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth."
REV3:10
The great tribulation? When? How about 70 a.d. and the Jewish apocalypse. Not the end of the world and certainly not a 2nd coming. That's future to us.!!!!;
@@davidwoods6015 I am so looking forward to his soon coming
It is very stunning listening to a discussion about a topic from "churchhistory", using terms that stem from a 100% Jewish background, without having any glimpse at all what these Jewish terms mean.
By the way Paul was a confessing and practicing Jew that never broke the law or the tradition. So about what law did he talk in what context????
Paul blasphemies the Ten Commandments.
Follow Jesus he is the Messiah, the living New Covenant.
Paul blasphemies the Messiah by blasphemiing the Ten Commandments.
@@KeepingWatch95 yes, indeed Paul blasphemed the ten commandments and then drove back to Jerusalem on a bicycle!
Let me propose something else: you got no idea of who Paul was! Isn't there in the new Testament a written report partly about Paul? It's Acts I guess. . .:22:3-5;23:6;24:14;26:4,5,22;28:23
@@grouchomarxx2217 _ Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
_Who was it that came and made war against the church?_
Acts 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.
Acts 8:2 And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him.
Acts 8:3 As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.
Acts 9:1 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
Acts 26:11 And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.
Galatians 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:
_Paul came and did what Revelation (which was written after Paul) recorded that the dragon came and did._
_It is Paul who came and made “war with the remnant which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”_
Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
@@grouchomarxx2217 The Messiah foretold of many false prophets to come, Paul came in fulfillment of this.
1st John records that there were many antichrist during the very time of the disciples. The antichrist went out fromn the disicples and did not continue with them.
Paul was with the disicples traveling in and out of Jerusalem with them, (and no Paul did not have a bicycle/perhaps maybe a witches broom) however Paul after Paul went out from the disciples he also did not continue with them.
@@grouchomarxx2217 The meaning of the word blasphemy.
Two Greek words. Blaspheme is Strong's concordance number G. 987. And Blasphemy G 988.
Strong's, G987 blaspheme.
From G989; to vilify; specifically to speak impiously: - Speak, blaspheme defame, rail on, revile, speak evil.
(Note. specifically to speak impiously: which means not showing respect or reverence, especially for God.)
Strong's, G988 Blasphemy
From G989; vilification (especially against God): - blasphemy, evil speaking, railing.
(Note: Vilify definition; which means to utter slanderous and abusive statements against, and to lower in estimation or importance.)
Blasphemy:
Number 1) Not showing respect or reverence, is Blasphemy.
Number 2) Uttering a slanderous abusive statement, is Blasphemy.
Number 3) Lowering in estimation or importance, is Blasphemy.
It’s also going to be the “great and terrible.” And we might be here.
And clearly being saved by grace does not mean we throw out obedience to Yah’s instruction in the Old Testament.
2 Tim 3:16
Scripture/Tanakh.
What about rewards?
As a dispensationalist I would disagree. The whole Bible is redemption based and the focus Christ. Israel is only the focal point in terms of prophetic timeliness of God. I have always divided the word of God as a wedding that Jesus describes...there are guests, friends, and the groom and bride... described throughout Scripture. You can see them throughout the dispensations.
In terms of over emphasis on Israel....as a dispensationalist your stance on me so far wouldn't be correct.
Jesus Christ and God's plan for redemption began before Genesis 1:1 and the whole Bible is about that...in its entirety.
I'm working on my doctor in theology and studying covenant theology right now and their over emphasis on the church in the Old Testament is actually confusing and "reaching" in my opinion... they aren't dividing correctly...
That the trinity is taught in scripture is clear. That God made a covenant within the Godhead seems sort of silly to me. Covenants are made to prove intent with solemnity. The members of the Godhead would never make a covenant with each other. They are the God that covenants resort to for their strength.
You are being to nice, Dispensationalism does enormous violence to the simplicity and efficacy of the gospel on many points. We can not embrace the essence of the gospel and then deny it at the same time which is what Dispensationalism does.
This should be interesting. I do not know what "reformed" is in contrast to dispensationalist. I studied on my own from an exclusively Biblical perspective, by which I mean I took a fresh Gideon's Bible and a highlighter, and went Genesis to Revelation marking all passages that had anything whatsoever to do with eschatological prophesy. Then, having completed that, I went through all the highlight passages looking for portions (verses and passages) that taught individual things that had only one possible meaning.
For example, if a symbolic passage may have indicated that Jesus either was, or was not, coming back (no, there is no such passage to my knowledge, hence a great non-example to show the method), and another that clearly said Jesus is coming back, and that passage could mean absolutely nothing but that Jesus was, in fact, coming back, the first passage had to conform to the second passage.
After that first list was compiled, I went back with my skeleton of doctrine and identified passages that had two possible meanings, and crossed out the ones that were not a logical option within the framework of the first list. And on and on until I was finished. Then I wrote my conclusions down in a book. No, it was not published. I wrote it for one purpose. So my wife and I could stop bickering over eschatology. LOL And, it worked.
Reformed vs Dispensationalist? But aren't orthodox, Lutherans, Catholics, Anglicans etc. non-dispensis as well?
@@Dilley_G45 Now I know the difference, and they are both totally whacked.
@@busker153 that wasn't my question though
@@Dilley_G45 That is a fair point. Your Question:
"Reformed vs Dispensationalist? But aren't orthodox, Lutherans, Catholics, Anglicans etc. non-dispensis as well?"
Answer:
I don't know.
@@busker153 well AFAIK they are.
what are your CREDENTIALS?
"We're in the era of the gospel of the Messiah, so the old testament is really not all that applicable. Other than to moralize it"
"...because of their (dispensationalists) high view of the Bible and their high view of the inerrancy they do tend to biblicize(sp?)...we need to see it chapter and verse in a text then we can believe it."
If dispensationalism is defined by seeing the importance of the OT and requiring a book, chapter, verse to have a belief, then sign me up.
And Israel in covenant theology? I've been studying scripture for many years and you don't even make sense through the lense of Scripture 😮
There is a big difference between the orthodox and sound doctrinal principle of dispensations and some human errors of people who make the claim of being a dispensationalist. Biblical error is error whether it is being made by somebody who claims to be dispensational in their hermeneutics and theology and by somebody who claims to be non dispensational or antidispensational. These differing hermeneutical and theological approaches do not prove that one side is right and the other side is wrong, this is nothing more than one groups bias against a different groups. In other words there is nothing but human authority and not divine authority behind these disputes. I think that the most probable category of error that dispensationalists might fall into is to overemphasize the discontinuities in the word of God and to under emphasize the continuities. For the non dispensationalist the broad category of error they are prone to making is just the opposite they deny the discontinuities of the word and only recognize the continuities. My point is that everyone should be humble enough to recognize their own fallibility so they won't fall into this trap and make this truly devilish destructive error and foolish presumptuous mistake.
I always seem to make an error of omission and not of commission, when I expound on biblical doctrines! One place where I think it is impossible for the non dispensationalist interpretive framework to be accurate and sound, is regarding the difference between the old covenant Israel who are God's covenant people but that fact does not mean they are God's begotten and born of the Spirit children. This fact even distinguishes John the Baptist anointing of the Holy Spirit and the being baptized in the Spirit that was promised to come through Christ himself. Before Pentecost salvation came through the keeping of the covenant law at least the 10 commandments anyway and the faith and hope of Israel which was that the lamb of God without blemish and without spot the kinsman redeemer and Messiah would through an atoning substitutionary sacrifice save his people of Israel from their sins and would raise them up from death in the resurrection of the just, and they would inherit the Messianic kingdom which would be like the lost paradise of the garden of Eden restored again on Earth. But salvation as a freely given gift of eternal life as a spiritual new creation and seed life and being begotten of the Holy Spirit of God and becoming a child of God made like unto the image and likeness of the Son of God, was NEVER available to anyone until the day of Pentecost not even to Israel, or even to the disciples and apostles of Christ, during his earthly ministry! Now if this radical change of the ground of faith and salvation doesn't represent a different dispensational change in the administration of God's heavenly rulership and kingdom and his relation to and dealing with his law and works based covenant people, to an entirely new gift, faith, Spirit life and grace based covenant ground then I don't know what would! Now in the very early church they were still operating within the framework of messianic Judaism, but later it became clear that God was going to save gentiles as well as Jews and when Paul received his revelation of the church of the mystery even the framework of messianic Judaism was a vessel that was inadequate and outdated and could not contain the new wine of the new revelation given by the risen and ascended Christ in glory! The other apostles agreed with this by the way as they were convicted by the person of the Holy Spirit that the revelation of the Word given to the apostle Paul was from God. Now the 12 continued to minister to Israel and to operate as messianic Jews rather than become a stumbling block to faith in Christ by abandoning the old covenant law like Paul seemed to be teaching the gentile converts to do. This was done not because they did not embrace the Pauline revelation but merely as an accommodation made to the Judaism to further the spread of the gospel among the Jewish people. The apostles were in agreement that the basic fundamentals of the milk of the word of God, the gospel of salvation and faith in Jesus Christ had to be made solid and secure in the immature believer before the more advanced truth and teaching of Paul's radical grace and faith plus nothing covenant grounding and dispensational teaching could be understood without it causing difficulty for the babe in Christ to be able to fully digest and absorb!
As a Seventh day Adventist we also oppose Dispensationalism.
All restoration movement groups are wrong
@@bigtobacco1098 As a Christian and a Seventh day Adventist I agree.
@@bigtobacco1098 I agree. The Gospel was always preached from the time of the death of Jesus till today.
@samuelwilliams1559 so where do the church go wrong ??
@@bigtobacco1098
When the RCC put the laws of men over the laws of God.
Then money and power lead the RCC to not teach what the Bible says.
But many still spread the Gospel in those days.
God is love.
If you're leaving dispensation theology just remember if you take that position you'd have to say that what Jesus said in Matthew 15:24 was a lie when He said "I've come not but for the Lost tribes of Israel" was a lie but for Gentiles too, and the fact of the matter is if Jesus didn't mean what he said when he said that then he was not the spotless sacrifice on the cross for our sins. You would also have to say what Paul said in Romans 15:8 and 16 was a lie as well as Paul made it very clear that Jesus ministry was for the circumcised (The Jews) Paul said his ministry was for the GENTILES in verse 16. I rest my case. This is why 2 Timothy chapter 2 verse 15 says...Study to show yourself approved of God a workman not ashamed rightly dividing the word of God. Also Paul said in an Ephesians chapter 3 that there was a revelation of a mystery of a DISPENSATION ( meaning change of requirements) of Grace revealed to him to give to the Gentiles, these dispensations are described in Hebrews 1:1 that says At Sundry times God chose different ways in how to deal with people through his prophets. The evidence of dispensation theology is therefore irrefutable.
I agree with others that you have mentioned MANY covenants that are NOT covenants to begin with...
Hebrews 9:18
Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
Where's the blood?
I will call out that they believe Eze 45:17 is future and that is dangerous. That text is not about a “memorial”. The word there is atonement. That is a different gospel.
Get Adam Harwood's Christian theology. Book of the Year -22.
Historically and Spiritually, a Christian can learn from every Word in the Bible.
Doctrinally, that's where we need to be careful.
But if you want to grow out a dark beard and run off into the mountains of Judea and pretend like you're a Jewish virgin chosen from the Tribe of Benjamin who gets beheaded by the antichrist while raising the dead and healing the sick, you can be my guest..... (or you can rightly divide and say that doesn't apply to Church Age Christians....)
That’s what I beleive. There’s more than one gospel. And that’s not heretical.
12:01 You go to God as the ultimate author but I would say that rather God was the General Editor of the Bible. In 1 Cor.1:16 Paul writes "Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any other." The Holy Spirit knew who Paul baptized. The Holy Spirit made sure that what was said was the infallible Word of God, what the Corinthians needed, and we need to read, neither they or we need to know who all Paul baptized.
Wow yea thats true and this always bothered me put never knew how to put it. Ive been in a despinsation church for years and i never really cared but it always frustrated me that they would focus so much on physical isreal and how they are set apart .i never believed in the theology but i was saved late in my life apart from the knowledge of Christian tradition so i just never understood it .. but i think the biggest issues i had from them is the complete total fear of the law as if it has no value or good and they claim paul teach that but he says that the laws is perfect and has value . Grace by faith doesn't make the law useless. If u read moses ,how many times does God say ( i am the god who sanctifes) . Obviously God gave the law and then alse he is the one who cleans us because even in the giving of the law God says a dozen times that God himself will do the washing..
Maybe I'm wrong but I'm glad to not be part of a denomination. Every back-and-forth in this comment section seems to be fodder to me. I'm neither for nor against dispensation.
If talking to a Christian, they'll say what their denomination teaches. Scripture to the contrary is dismissed as it doesn't apply to them (and/ or me). They will say that James isn't written to me. Hebrews isn't written to me. The parts of any of the 4 gospels contrary to their beliefs is not written to me, but to someone else. I quickly quip back, then none of it applies to me. I'm not a Thessalonian, therefore Thessalonians does not apply to me. There's no letter of Paul to the Americans so nothing applies to me. If Matthew 18 doesn't apply to me, then no other chapter applies to me either.
If there's a benefit for not being denominational is that I have no indoctrination that I am loyal to. From here I could write a book on how in both cases, I'm right and wrong not to participate in church, or maybe I do participate (even though I don't attend) , maybe both are true.
There are so many caveats. Yet the confidence of those in error is exceedingly. It all seems like fodder.
You have some good stuff.
From one man made doctrine to another. Although some positive aspects are evident in both Disp, and CT, both are ultimately unscriptural.
What is scriptural then ?
@@babicutatacelu2366 God is a Covenant making, and Covenant keeping God. Everything He does in relationship with His Creation is based on Covenant. Identifying those covenants and their extent is the key to understanding His purpose for us and for His Creation. In this both CT and DT have some truth, however, Dispensationalism does not seem to see the New Covenant encompassing all of God's people (thety still see some kind of special place for Israel) CT on the other hand teaches that the New Covenant is just another "administration" of the overarching "Covenant of Grace" they THINK they see in Genesis. Neither give the full picture. The truth lies in the middle where ALL that the Old Covenant and also the Abrahamic Covenant as well, for that matter, were shadows and promises of Whom Jesus Christ is the substance and the fulfillment. The New Covenant is just that: NEW in every respect and it gathers up and fulfills all other shadows. What's more all of the Old passes away in it's light. I believe that this is the Scriptural Truth.