AV1611 Bible Forum Archive

AV1611 Bible Forum Archive (https://av1611.com/forums/index.php)
-   Doctrine (https://av1611.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Dispensationalism (https://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1337)

Jassy 06-06-2009 01:46 PM

Dispensationalism
 
Hi - I'm sharing this since this one was particularly good at explaining dispensationalism and how it relates to Christians TODAY. This guy always uses the KJV and he encourages forwarding to others.

Jassy

---------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL GOODIES
Issue #2039 June 05, 2009
---------------------------------------

DISPENSATION: ITS MEANING, AFFECT, DISTRIBUTION, & IMPORTANCE

"If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward" (Ephesians 3:2).

The word used to translate "dispensation" is oikonomia; Paul uses this word four times in his epistles. Surprisingly many believers are completely unaware of its meaning and importance. It has been a long neglected subject by the majority of Bible students. Just what is a "dispensation?"

WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE WORD "DISPENSATION"?

The word dispensation has to do with the act of distribution, or dealing out; it is a divine administration, economy, or stewardship. Dispensation comes from the word dispense. It can be seen in the word dispensary.

A dispensation is not, as is commonly believed, a period of time. W.C. Vine in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words gives the following definition:

"A dispensation is not a period or epoch (a common, but erroneous use of the word), but a mode of dealing, an arrangement, or administration of affairs."

HOW DO DISPENSATIONS AFFECT ME?

Throughout the Bible God has had different administrations (or dispensations). In God's dispensations, as with that of the farmer, it is very important to do the work of the present season. For example, there are truths that belong to Israel that DO NOT belong to the Body of Christ. II Timothy 2:15 plainly gives us the answer:

"Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth."

Many try to follow the dispensations of the Hebrew Scriptures (Romans 15:4) or of Christ's earthly ministry (Romans 15:8); but Paul was given the dispensation for us (Colossians 1:2-26, Ephesians 3:2-3, Romans 15:15-16, 16:25, 26).

WHAT DOES THIS PRESENT DISPENSATION "DISPENSE"?

"… The dispensation of the GRACE OF GOD …" (Ephesians 3:2).

The dispensation given to Paul for us today was one of God's grace. This is the key to God's progressive revelation regarding Himself and His plan of the ages. It is so important for the student of the Scriptures to recognize this wonderful truth. God's present, and pinnacle purpose is one of grace. He is dispensing, or dealing out His grace. We live in God's grace dispensary. The Father's sole mode of dealing is in grace.

WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE IF UNDERSTANDING THE DISPENSATIONS?

"And if a man strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully" (II Timothy
2:5).

A participant in any race must follow the rules for that game or they will not win the prize. How sad it is that many believers, even though they are very sincere, won't be "approved unto God" as regarding their service and conduct of life because they did not study with the purpose to "rightly divide the Word of Truth." Thy have not become a part of God's present purpose – of being a dispensary of the Father's grace. They neither live in grace themselves, nor with others.

God did not give Paul the administering of a stewardship of grace so that we could simply make "dispensational charts;" but so that we would be receptors and channels of "the riches of His grace" (Ephesians 1:7; 2:7).

"Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ" (Ephesians 3:8).

"If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward" (Ephesians 3:2).

Clyde L. Pilkington, Jr.
Daily Email Goodies

---------------------------
DAILY EMAIL GOODIES

Know someone who might enjoy this Daily Email Goodie? Why not forward it to them?

Receive the Daily Email Goodies by signing up at:

http://dailyemailgoodies.com

Do you have choice quotes that you would like to share with others who receive the Daily Email Goodies? Send them to us at:

Goodies@StudyShelf.com

Be sure to put "Daily Email Goodies" in your subject heading.

OUR WEEKLY PERIODICAL

If you enjoy the Daily Email Goodies, you would probably also enjoy our weekly Bible study periodical, the Bible Student's Notebook, which is available in two formats: Electronic (e-mailed to you) and Printed (mailed to you). Get your free sample issue at:

http://biblestudentsnotebook.com

OUR ONLINE ARTICLES

Read past articles from the Bible Student's Notebook online:

http://www.pilkingtonandsons.com/Articles.htm

OUR BLOGS
We have 14 blogs on various subjects set up. To view these blogs visit:

http://www.pilkingtonandsons.com/ourblogs.htm

tonybones2112 06-06-2009 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jassy (Post 21735)
Hi - I'm sharing this since this one was particularly good at explaining dispensationalism and how it relates to Christians TODAY. This guy always uses the KJV and he encourages forwarding to others.

Jassy

---------------------------------------
DAILY EMAIL GOODIES
Issue #2039 June 05, 2009
---------------------------------------

DISPENSATION: ITS MEANING, AFFECT, DISTRIBUTION, & IMPORTANCE

"If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward" (Ephesians 3:2).

The word used to translate "dispensation" is oikonomia; Paul uses this word four times in his epistles. Surprisingly many believers are completely unaware of its meaning and importance. It has been a long neglected subject by the majority of Bible students. Just what is a "dispensation?"

WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE WORD "DISPENSATION"?

The word dispensation has to do with the act of distribution, or dealing out; it is a divine administration, economy, or stewardship. Dispensation comes from the word dispense. It can be seen in the word dispensary.

A dispensation is not, as is commonly believed, a period of time. W.C. Vine in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words gives the following definition:

"A dispensation is not a period or epoch (a common, but erroneous use of the word), but a mode of dealing, an arrangement, or administration of affairs."

HOW DO DISPENSATIONS AFFECT ME?

Throughout the Bible God has had different administrations (or dispensations). In God's dispensations, as with that of the farmer, it is very important to do the work of the present season. For example, there are truths that belong to Israel that DO NOT belong to the Body of Christ. II Timothy 2:15 plainly gives us the answer:

"Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth."

Many try to follow the dispensations of the Hebrew Scriptures (Romans 15:4) or of Christ's earthly ministry (Romans 15:8); but Paul was given the dispensation for us (Colossians 1:2-26, Ephesians 3:2-3, Romans 15:15-16, 16:25, 26).

WHAT DOES THIS PRESENT DISPENSATION "DISPENSE"?

"… The dispensation of the GRACE OF GOD …" (Ephesians 3:2).

The dispensation given to Paul for us today was one of God's grace. This is the key to God's progressive revelation regarding Himself and His plan of the ages. It is so important for the student of the Scriptures to recognize this wonderful truth. God's present, and pinnacle purpose is one of grace. He is dispensing, or dealing out His grace. We live in God's grace dispensary. The Father's sole mode of dealing is in grace.

WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE IF UNDERSTANDING THE DISPENSATIONS?

"And if a man strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully" (II Timothy
2:5).

A participant in any race must follow the rules for that game or they will not win the prize. How sad it is that many believers, even though they are very sincere, won't be "approved unto God" as regarding their service and conduct of life because they did not study with the purpose to "rightly divide the Word of Truth." Thy have not become a part of God's present purpose – of being a dispensary of the Father's grace. They neither live in grace themselves, nor with others.

God did not give Paul the administering of a stewardship of grace so that we could simply make "dispensational charts;" but so that we would be receptors and channels of "the riches of His grace" (Ephesians 1:7; 2:7).

"Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ" (Ephesians 3:8).

"If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward" (Ephesians 3:2).

Clyde L. Pilkington, Jr.
Daily Email Goodies

---------------------------
DAILY EMAIL GOODIES

Know someone who might enjoy this Daily Email Goodie? Why not forward it to them?

Receive the Daily Email Goodies by signing up at:

http://dailyemailgoodies.com

Do you have choice quotes that you would like to share with others who receive the Daily Email Goodies? Send them to us at:

Goodies@StudyShelf.com

Be sure to put "Daily Email Goodies" in your subject heading.

OUR WEEKLY PERIODICAL

If you enjoy the Daily Email Goodies, you would probably also enjoy our weekly Bible study periodical, the Bible Student's Notebook, which is available in two formats: Electronic (e-mailed to you) and Printed (mailed to you). Get your free sample issue at:

http://biblestudentsnotebook.com

OUR ONLINE ARTICLES

Read past articles from the Bible Student's Notebook online:

http://www.pilkingtonandsons.com/Articles.htm

OUR BLOGS
We have 14 blogs on various subjects set up. To view these blogs visit:

http://www.pilkingtonandsons.com/ourblogs.htm

Jassy, I never heard of this man but thank you for bringing it to my attention. He a Grace believer as I am, what is known as a Pauline Dispensationalist. Dispensationalism is the result of what we call right division:

II Tim, 214 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

Clarence Larkin and CI Scofield taught 7 "dispensations". In the Army, if you get sick, you see the doctor, he prescribes medicine, you go to the "dispensary" and they give you the medicine. God has "dispensed" His word and will to different people in different ages in different ways(Heb. 1).

Ge 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
Ge 6:22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.
Ge 7:5 And Noah did according unto all that the LORD commanded him.
Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
1Pe 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
2Pe 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

God gave Noah a "dispensation" to preach to the world, that dispensation, that message, was repent from unrighteousness, repent from your evil wickedness, and wiated on the world to respond to Noah's preaching, all the while the Ark was being built. We know the result. That is one example of God "dispensing" His word and will, His program for that time. Noah never said, "look forward to the cross of Christ and the gospel of grace" because Noah knew nothing of the cross or the gospel of grace given to Paul.

God gave to Abraham a "dispensation": In your seed will all the world be blessed, a nation set apart from all others, the nation and Kingdom that My righteousness will go forth from. When God led this nation out of bondage in Egypt He took Moses and gave Moses the "dispensation" of the Law to train and point out to man God's perfection and man's imperfection. In the days of John the baptist Christ came and said, I came not to do away with this Law, I am the fulfillment of it. I came to do what it cannot. I am what the Law pointed towards. National Israel rejected Christ with three murders: John the Baptist, Jesus Christ Himself, and Stephen in Acts 7.

Eph. 2 and 3, Galatians 2, Romans 11 and Acts 15 are essential to this truth: God had a program, a "dispensation", that was revealed nowhere in the Scriptures, in prophecy, or to any man until it was revealed to Paul: In Time Past the Gentiles were exalted by the exaltation of Israel and had no pathway to God except through Israel. As Paul says in Eoh.2 "but now" Jews and Gentiles are equal and together on one Body that did not exist before Paul, that no Jew in Israel had a concept of. If you study the extremist racial, spiritual and social bigotry and separatism that Israel had for all nations but themselves, you will begin to understand Eph. 3:

Eph. 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you–ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which 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;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
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:

This is Paul's commission, not given to the 12 Apostles, because they were apostles to Israel, Paul is the apostle to the Gentiles and Jews both. The "church" under the 12 apostles was exalted by Israel's rise(Romans 11), "but now" Israel has fallen. We cannot seek a pathway to God through Israel, they have been set aside, now everyone can seek that saving pathway to God, not through Israel and the 12 Apostles, but through Paul and his gospel, Christ crucified apart from the works of the Law.

Jassy as I said, Larkin and Scofield divided the "dispensations" into seven, Paul gives us however three:

Eph. 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
11 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;
12 That 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:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

Jassy, in Time Past the Gentiles were out of it, damned, doomed, and lost except through becoming part of Israel(proselyte). But now we are one Body with Christ without Israel, and equal with and to them.

"Ages to come"? This is the rise of Israel again after the Rapture, the Tribulation, the 1000 year kingdom of priests on earth, then on into eternity where our glory is in the heavens, Israel's is in the earth.

If we read this(The Scripture i cite, not me) and believe it, then Paul says this will work effectually in us. If Paul's message is the message for today, "but now", then we see the Scriptures dispensations divided as

Genesis-Acts 28: Time Past. The Beginning of all things, the Fathers of Israel, National Israel, Christ's ministry to Israel, the 12 apostle's ministry to Israel, Paul's final dealings with Israel and the end of water baptism, signs, tongues, wonders, healings, raising from the dead, all cease at Acts 28 as they are the "signs of an apostle" and Israel required signs.
Romans-Philemon: But Now, church doctrine for today given to Paul and through Paul to us today.
Hebrews-Revelation: Tribulation doctrine for Israel, not the Body of Christ today.

Paul tells us:

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

We can "rightly divide" Paul's letters to us in this manner:

Doctrine- Romans.
Reproof- I & II Corinthians.
Correction- Galatians thru Colossians.
Instruction In Righteousness- I Thes./Philemon

Paul was the greatest of all the Apostles, he was called by God The Wise Masterbuilder, because he was the custodian of the transition from Time Past(the Messianic Church Of Peter, James, and John) through to today, But Now, and then preparing the Jews for the Tribulation as the author of Hebrews, Ages To Come.

Jassy, when I saw the truth of this dispensational teaching of rightly dividing the Bible, all contradictions disappeared. If you readwhat it says, where it says it, to who it says it to, and believe it from that method given to us by Paul, you will start learning things faster than you can write them down or keep track of.

Grace and peace sister, I hope this helps you.

Tony

chette777 06-06-2009 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybones2112 (Post 21742)
We can "rightly divide" Paul's letters to us in this manner:

Doctrine- Romans.
Reproof- I & II Corinthians.
Correction- Galatians thru Colossians.
Instruction In Righteousness- I Thes./Philemon

TBones,
you can actually divide the one book of Romans into the the same divisions plus more. not in the same order as you have divided Paul's letters. Remember we are not commanded to rightly divide Paul but the Word of Truth so that would be the whole Scripture.

If all we had was the Book of Romans we would have enough to live the correct Christian life.

Bro. Parrish 06-07-2009 12:28 PM

Jassy,
I think most of us realize the importance of dispensational truth, and most are going to consider ourselves to be "moderate dispensationalists."

But if you think about it, the fact that we are told to RIGHTLY divide (2 Timothy 2:15) means you can also WRONGLY divide the Bible, so please don't get confused with Hyperdispensational nonsense. This kind of doctrine is often filled with quagmires of “private interpretation” and sometimes flat out heresies.
Here are a few more articles for your consideration...
http://www.gotothebible.com/HTML/wrongly1.html
http://www.victory-baptist.net/hyper.htm#_ftn13
http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/hy...tionalism.html

Jassy 06-07-2009 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybones2112 (Post 21742)
Jassy, I never heard of this man but thank you for bringing it to my attention. He a Grace believer as I am, what is known as a Pauline Dispensationalist. Dispensationalism is the result of what we call right division:

Yes, I'm a grace believer also and, if that is known as a "Pauline Dispensationalist", then that is what I am. I just don't know the proper terminology.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybones2112 (Post 21742)
God gave Noah a "dispensation" to preach to the world,

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybones2112 (Post 21742)
God gave to Abraham a "dispensation":

So these dispensations were not related to TIME PERIODS or ERAS, but to specific persons that God chose to carry out His will or to reveal certain things to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybones2112 (Post 21742)
God had a program, a "dispensation", that was revealed nowhere in the Scriptures, in prophecy, or to any man until it was revealed to Paul:

And this is, therefore, a "program."

There is another Christian that I know, who is also a KJV believer, strong in the Word, who said that God's dispensions are related to ERA's and that now we are in the CHURCH era. But I see that so many people think that this Church era is the LAST dispensation. However, God still has future dispensations that He will give, according to His own time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybones2112 (Post 21742)
Jassy, when I saw the truth of this dispensational teaching of rightly dividing the Bible, all contradictions disappeared. If you readwhat it says, where it says it, to who it says it to, and believe it from that method given to us by Paul, you will start learning things faster than you can write them down or keep track of.

Yes, so much has cleared-up for me, once I understood about dispensation and God's overall plan. When a believer tries to mix up that up, their mind will be in chaos and they lose their understanding of "rightly dividing."

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybones2112 (Post 21742)
Grace and peace sister, I hope this helps you.

Thank you brother! It does help tremendously, in that it verified that I am on the right track in my understanding.

Jassy

Jassy 06-07-2009 01:53 PM

Bro Parrish,

Thank you for the links, brother. I will take a look at them! I'm sure they will be helpful in my growing understanding.

Jassy

greenbear 06-07-2009 04:12 PM

Tony,

Thanks for your post above. I think I would like to listen to that 4 CD set you were talking about. Please let me know how I can get a hold of it.

grace and peace,

Jen

tonybones2112 06-08-2009 03:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 21755)
TBones,
you can actually divide the one book of Romans into the the same divisions plus more. not in the same order as you have divided Paul's letters. Remember we are not commanded to rightly divide Paul but the Word of Truth so that would be the whole Scripture.

If all we had was the Book of Romans we would have enough to live the correct Christian life.

Chette, I'm confused. If we are not "commanded" to rightly divide Paul why then "rightly divide" the book of Romans? We can find doctrine in Philemon, we can find reproof in Romans, we can find correction in I Thes. and we can find instruction in righteousness in I Cor. There is a doctrinal application for every verse of Scripture in the Bible, we can find the doctrine of God having Blood in Acts 20:28, we can find as I pointed out to Will Kenney the clear teaching the earth is round in Luke 17 when the unbelieving world was saying it was flat, we find the similitude of all personal witnessing in Acts 17 with Paul's experience on Mars Hill. Noah said, be righteous, turn from your unrighteousness, get on the boat someone else is built and be saved from the wrath of God. God says today, believe the gospel of Christ crucified and get into Christ and be saved from the wrath of hell that you deserve yet I paid for. "Five" fundamentals? Brother, there are thousands. Not all of them apply to us today though and are there for our learning and admonition.

Of course we can rightly divide Paul, he is "all Scripture" as much as any other, because nowhere in Scripture are you going to find out
Who
You
Are
In
Christ
but in Paul.

Grace and peace brother

Tony

chette777 06-08-2009 04:21 AM

I just taught through Romans in our church and it was funny that your outline of all his letters lined up with my outline of the book of Romans. so I made that comment.

I just reminded you that it is all scripture not just Paul's letters we are to divide.

tonybones2112 06-08-2009 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenbear (Post 21790)
Tony,

Thanks for your post above. I think I would like to listen to that 4 CD set you were talking about. Please let me know how I can get a hold of it.

grace and peace,

Jen

If you go to www.graceimpact.org or call that phone # I gave you and ask for the 4 CD set, 2 of the CDs are What Is This Thing Called Grace and the other is Jekyll & Hyde Christians. I don't know the names of the other two CDs, the missus loaned them to two of her co-workers, who are mostly Catholics and Pentecostals. This 4 CD album is 18 bucks and is worth 100 times that much.When you have heard all these CDs you will see just what I have been saying all along: We Grace believers are fundamentalist Christians the same as any other, the only difference is we don't teach water baptism as being operative for today, and that we do not follow Peter, James and John nor the four gospels as being the pattern for church doctrine for today.

I don't make a dime off these CDs or Brother Jordan's ministry. I recommend his CDs and DVDs because you can hardly sit still and listen to them without getting up and running the aisles, so to speak. I know few Christians of any "sect" or "denomination" that is as evangelistic as Brother Rick is for preaching Christ crucified and witnessing.

I can't recommend his messages highly enough, I think you will enjoy them and get a lot of edification from them.

Grace and peace sister

Tony

tonybones2112 06-08-2009 07:56 AM

Yes, I'm a grace believer also and, if that is known as a "Pauline Dispensationalist", then that is what I am. I just don't know the proper terminology.

Sister, one of two Grace websites I recommend defines Berean "dispensationalists", Pauline "dispensationalists", Progressive "dispensationalists", Early-Acts "dispensationalists", Mid-Acts "dispensationalists", Late-Acts "dispensationalists", Covenant "dispensationalists", the terminology is confusing so for the momet I'll stick with you and call myself a "Pauline" dispensationlist and a Christian.

So these dispensations were not related to TIME PERIODS or ERAS, but to specific persons that God chose to carry out His will or to reveal certain things to.

They are both. For purposes of Bible study CI Scofield divided the Scriptures into 7 "ages" or "dispensations"(administrations). These seven dispensations as taught by Scofield are:

1. Man innocent.
2. Man under conscience.
3. Man in authority over the earth.
4. Man under promise.
5. Man under law.
6. Man under grace.
7. Man under the personal reign of Christ.

Scofield states(underlining is mine):

The Scriptures divide time (by which is meant the entire period from the creation of Adam to the "new heaven and a new earth" of Rev. 21: 1) into seven unequal periods, usually called dispensations (Eph. 3:2), although these periods are also called ages (Eph. 2:7) and days, as in "day of the Lord."

There is only one problem with this statement and the seven divisions: The Scriptures don't divide time into seven "ages", they divide them into only three:

Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Eph 2:11 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;
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

The problem with Scofield's "seven" dispensations is that there are no "dispensers"(administrators)under the first four of Scofield's "dispensations".

If Israel had accepted Christ as their Messiah, their High Priest then there would have been only two dispensations and the Apostle John gives them in this verse:

John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

If Israel had accepted Christ in Acts 7 rather than murdered Stephen in rejecting Christ, there would have been only two "dispensations"

1. Man under law: Dispenser:Moses. The redemption of Mankind through Israel.
2. Man under the personal reign of Christ: Dispenser: Jesus Christ. The Tribulation of Joel chapter 2, rise of Israel. The redemption of Mankind with Christ reigning in Jerusalem, watching every move you make.Final battle at the end of the Millennium, then Eternity.

Now, we know Israel rejected Christ in Acts 7, and Paul was called to receive the revelation of the mystery of the Body of Christ, the "dispensation" of the Grace of God where Mankind's redemption was through Paul's gospel, apart from Israel and apart from the works of the Law where something unheard of and impossible had now taken place: Jews and Gentiles were together, in ONE Body, and equal. This revelation was kept hid in God and revealed to no one until it was revealed to Paul

Now, is that "Tony The Heretical Bullingerite's" "false" teaching?

No, it's Romans 11, Eph. 2, and Eph 3.

Scofield taught seven dispensations, Paul taught only three. Between a man, a Gentile saved by grace(Scofield), and the Apostle To The Gentiles(Paul), who was a Jew and one of the oracles of God, I'll take the Apostle to the Gentiles(Paul) and see the truth of:

1. Time Past- Man under law. Dispenser: Moses. The redemption of Mankind through Israel.
2. But Now- Man under grace. Dispenser:Paul.called to receive the revelation of the mystery of the Body of Christ, the "dispensation" of the Grace of God where Mankind's redemption was through Paul's gospel, apart from Israel and apart from the works of the Law where something unheard of and impossible had now taken place: Jews and Gentiles were together, in ONE Body, and equal. This revelation was kept hid in God and revealed to no one until it was revealed to Paul
3. Ages To Come- Man under the personal reign of Christ: Dispenser: Jesus Christ. The Tribulation of Joel chapter 2, rise of Israel. The redemption of Mankind with Christ reigning in Jerusalem, watching every move you make.Final battle at the end of the Millennium, then Eternity.

Jassy, many Christians today feel and teach that you are:

A bad Christian if you weren't baptized in water
A bad Christian if you don't speak in tongues
A bad Christian if you don't take the "Lord's Supper"
A bad Christian if you don't "tithe"
A bad Christian if you don't handle snakes
A bad Christian if you don't "confess your sins to God" periodically
A bad Christian if you don't follow the "great commission"
A bad Christian if you didn't become bulletproof and disease proof at salvation

The reason they teach and feel these things is becasue they have been taught and believe they are in the church founded at Acts 2 by the 12 Apostles. The 12 apostles did not know the first thing about the church you and I are in:

Eph. 2:5 Which 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;
Eph. 2:9 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:

See, I have one big problem with this little list I gave you above:

Col. 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

I have not yet found one single "ordinance" that is of sight, that is a of a show in the flesh, that I can think of that I could, by my own and some other man's efforts add to that completeness.

And that's why grace "dispensationalists", "dry cleaners", "hypers & ultras", "church splitters" are looked down on as being "false teachers": We don't need anything but the gospel of Christ crucified, we don't need anything but Jesus Christ Himself. We've been here since the first century AD, the doctrines and commandments of men and the gates of hell have not prevailed against us and in 2009 had there never been a Protestant "reformation" we'd still be here.

And this is, therefore, a "program."

Yes, exactly. The program changed from the Nation of Israel, the church in the wilderness, over to exactly what God prophesied would happen, the believing remnant of the Messianic Apostolic church, the "program" changed again when God set Israel aside and grafted the Body made of primarily Gentiles into the Messianic church, the "program" will change when He Raptures the church out of the world and then begins to deal with Israel again.

There is another Christian that I know, who is also a KJV believer, strong in the Word, who said that God's dispensions are related to ERA's and that now we are in the CHURCH era. But I see that so many people think that this Church era is the LAST dispensation. However, God still has future dispensations that He will give, according to His own time.

Well, I agree with him we are in the church, the Body of Christ, the age of grace, the "but now", but these other Christians you mention are wrong because Paul says there is a "dispensation" after this one which is "ages to come"- Tribulation, Millennial Kingdom Of Heaven under Israel with Christ as King, then Eternity.

Yes, so much has cleared-up for me, once I understood about dispensation and God's overall plan. When a believer tries to mix up that up, their mind will be in chaos and they lose their understanding of "rightly dividing."


Thank you brother! It does help tremendously, in that it verified that I am on the right track in my understanding.

Jassy

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto Tony Bones, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

That's not what the verse says, does it sister? Take any message I post in this forum, if there is any suspicion that I am making converts to EW Bullinger, the Berean Bible Society of Cornelius Stam, or teaching "false doctrine" and then:

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Ro 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Grace and peace sister Jassy

Tony

Fredoheaven 06-08-2009 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish (Post 21780)
Jassy,
I think most of us realize the importance of dispensational truth, and most are going to consider ourselves to be "moderate dispensationalists."

But if you think about it, the fact that we are told to RIGHTLY divide (2 Timothy 2:15) means you can also WRONGLY divide the Bible, so please don't get confused with Hyperdispensational nonsense. This kind of doctrine is often filled with quagmires of “private interpretation” and sometimes flat out heresies.
Here are a few more articles for your consideration...
http://www.gotothebible.com/HTML/wrongly1.html
http://www.victory-baptist.net/hyper.htm#_ftn13
http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/hy...tionalism.html

:amen: thanks for the links. I have my copy of "In defense of Biblical and Historical Christianity, I just download way back on August 30, 1998 and still studying Paulicians. The Author which I don't know said that the Paulicians were being falsely charged that they rejected ordinances. But what the Paulicians merely rejected were the Catholic practices of infant baptism. Any study of Paulicians brother? Any links? Not that with Wikepedia which cited that Paulicians never believed in the water baptism at all.

God bless you.

Winman 06-12-2009 07:32 PM

Bro Parrish

I also enjoyed those links. Now I understand some of the viewpoints of those I have been wrestling with here lately much better. I have been saying there is only one gospel, and Ruckman agrees.

Quote:


FALSE TEACHINGS OF HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISTS

PETER AND PAUL PREACHED "DIFFERENT" GOSPELS. If they did then Peter was cursed (Gal. 1:8-9). God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43, which he publicly acknowledges in Acts 15:11, while ALL ARE PRACTICING WATER BAPTISM.
I have been studying this on my own every night. And you know what? I came to the same conclusions as Ruckman.

chette777 06-13-2009 12:22 AM

Not all who hold to the view that from Acts 1 to 10 Peter taught a Kingdom Gospel. and after Acts 10 we have no more record of Peter preaching any Gospel. So that's right from Acts 10 on Peter taught the same Gospel as Paul. but from Acts 1-8 Peter was teaching the Kingdom Gospel, Paul had not been called yet. up until Acts 9 Paul was persecuting Jews who believed Jesus Was the Messiah and true king of Israel.

Not all who see the gospel from Matt-acts8 as the kingdom Gospel, and the Gospel from Acts 10-Philemon the Gospel of Grace are Hyper dispensationalists.

there are dispensations and there are right division of the word of truth. these are not the same

Winman 06-13-2009 03:15 PM

Chette

I really don't care what you label yourself, hyper, ultra, or just dispensationalists, whatever you want to call yourself. You and others teach there is more than one gospel, and I disagree with this completely and so does Ruckman. I am not a follower of Peter Ruckman, I know very little about him and have only read just a few articles by him since I came to this forum. But I can read, and I have been studying this subject very carefully, and the scriptures tell me there is only one gospel as Ruckman also says.

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

I think these verses are very clear, and easily understood. Paul is saying there is one gospel, and one gospel only. And he warns those who would pervert this. I don't know about you, but I would be terrified to dare teach another gospel.

And I have already shown that Peter was not teaching the restoration of the kingdom to Israel if the Jews repented of killing Jesus. You have not one verse in the book of Acts to support your view. The only verse that could possibly be perceived this way is Acts 3:20. And it is a stretch to do so.

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

First, Peter says to repent "that your sins may be blotted out" and does not mention the restoration of the kingdom. Second, yes, he does say Jesus will return, but this is the same message that all Christians have. We today await Jesus's return. But note that the heaven must receive Jesus until the "times" of restitution of all things. This shows that at least two ages or times must take place before Jesus would return. So Peter could not have been promising the immediate return of Jesus if the Jews repented of killing Jesus.

And in Acts 11 Peter confirms that the Gentiles were hearing the same gospel as the Jews in the early chapters of Acts.

Acts 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

Here Peter says these Gentiles received the Holy Ghost just as they did on the Day of Pentacost. And these Gentiles received the Holy Ghost by hearing, not baptism. And note in verse 19 that the Gentiles ALSO were granted repentance unto life.

Not one mention here of the restoration of the kingdom. But Peter does mention believeing on Jesus (repentance) to the receiving of everlasting life.

Chette, the trouble with this dispensationalism is that it gives you a pre-determinded bias before you read scripture. So instead of clearly and simply understanding what the scriptures say, you try to interpret them to fit your preconceived bias. And in this case, you have come up with another gospel that is never mentioned in Acts. In fact, the word "gospel" does not even occur in Acts until chapter 8 when Peter and John preach to the Samaritans.

Acts 8:25 And they, when they had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans.

This is the first mention of the gospel in Acts. It is not about the restoration of the kingdom, and it is not even to the Jews.

I think you should heed the warning of Paul not to preach another gospel.

chette777 06-13-2009 06:08 PM

then what you are saying is you don't believe the word of God which declares 3 gospels in the New testament. of course we all agree there is only one for today.

Winman 06-13-2009 06:30 PM

You got it. I believe there is only one gospel as Paul preached.

Gal 1:Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

What part of "any other gospel" do you not understand??

If I am wrong, I am in error and do not properly understand the scriptures. If you are wrong, you are accursed.

That is not my saying, this is what the scriptures say.

chette777 06-13-2009 06:40 PM

then what you are saying is you don't believe the word of God which declares 3 gospels in the New testament. of course we all agree there is only one for today. but the problem you face is this the Gospel john, Christ and the 12 preached before the cross was not the same as what Paul taught and neither is the Gospel of the Angel in Revelation. nor was the Gospel that peter taught after acts 1 through Acts 6.

The first Gospel in the New Testament

The first four verse are are clearly stated to be gospels (which would not be the same as Paul's Gospel) it is offered by Jesus the 12 and John the Baptist. The Gospel they preach required repentance, baptism which are works. all this is offered before the Cross. it is to Israel alone and if they believed they the Kingdom could be established. the remaining scriptures support these four

Mt 4:23 ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
Mt 9:35 ¶ And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.
Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
Mr 1:14 ¶ Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,

These verses are supporting versdes as to what is being offered wioth this Gospel, and it is the Kingdom. this gospel is being offered after the resurrection because God teh Father answerwed Jesus Prayer to forgive them for they know not what they do. and it will be the rejection of the fulness of God during the post resurrection days.

Mt 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mt 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mt 10:7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mr 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. (you see the word repent before believe indicates a work)
Lu 8:1 ¶ And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve [were] with him,
Lu 9:2 And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. (all these gospel preachings are before the cross)

The Second Gospel in the New Testament

Here is Paul's Gospel and has no similarity with the Kingdom Gospel. this gospel requires only belief or faith. this Gospel is called the gospel of Grace, the gospel of His Son, the Gospel of God, the Gospel of Christ never does Paul this Gospel in any of his writing the gospel "the gospel of the Kingdom"

Also it is from the time of Paul's conversion that if any man preach another Gospel he is to be accursed (Galatians) the kingdom gospel presentation with it's works is officially over and it was only to Jews and Jewish converts like the Eunuch.

Ac 20:24 But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.
Ro 1:9 For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers;
Ro 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
Ro 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
Ro 15:19 Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

these verses describes the gospel, you will notice that the Kingdom gospel has no burial resurrection and rising until after the cross and it is added to the Kingdom gospel only to convince Israel that Jesus was indeed the Christ, their King. Paul's gospel never refers to the kingdom and the mystery is revealed that Christ dies for all men's sins and the grace of God is given freely to those who believe not on him as King or Messiah but as Saviour.

1Co 15:1 ¶ Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

The Third Gospel in the New Testament.


the third Gospel which will be preached in the future Tribulation is the Everlasting Gospel and what it entails in described in the verses itself

Re 14:6 ¶ And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

chette777 06-13-2009 06:44 PM

If you deny that these three exist in the NT you are willfully denying the word of God.

Winman 06-13-2009 06:48 PM

OK, your supposed "first" gospel.

Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

OK Chette, is this what Christians should do? This gospel is to be preached in all the world unto all nations. That means Gentiles too.

Of course, if it is the gospel to believe on Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, it is not a problem, it would be the same gospel.

And what gospel did Jesus preach to the Jews?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Remember who Jesus was speaking to when he said this? Nicodemus, a Jew.

What works were the Jews to do?

John 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

No baptism mentioned here, simply believe on him whom God hath sent. Jesus. Same gospel I heard when I got saved.

Biblestudent 06-14-2009 03:28 AM

Winman,
According to Peter (Acts 3:19) are going to be blotted out "when the times of refreshing shall come". When is that?

Paul taught that in Christ we have -- present tense -- redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins (Col. 1:14). How then can Acts 3:19 be the same as the gospel that Paul preached?

tonybones2112 06-14-2009 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biblestudent (Post 22117)
Winman,
According to Peter (Acts 3:19) are going to be blotted out "when the times of refreshing shall come". When is that?

Paul taught that in Christ we have -- present tense -- redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins (Col. 1:14). How then can Acts 3:19 be the same as the gospel that Paul preached?

I guess, seen through a sound mind(common sense), that it is not the same gospel.

Grace and peace

Tony

premio53 06-14-2009 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biblestudent (Post 22117)
Winman,
According to Peter (Acts 3:19) are going to be blotted out "when the times of refreshing shall come". When is that?

Paul taught that in Christ we have -- present tense -- redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins (Col. 1:14). How then can Acts 3:19 be the same as the gospel that Paul preached?

In the context it is obvious that Peter is talking about when Christ comes again, He will restore all things to their original perfection, before sin and the curse came into the world. Notice in verse 19 that Peter said "repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out." He did not add baptism showing it is not necessary fro salvation.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

I don't understand the obsession of trying to make Paul contradict Peter or Paul contradict the Lord Jesus.

Bro. Parrish 06-14-2009 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premio53 (Post 22140)
I don't understand the obsession of trying to make Paul contradict Peter or Paul contradict the Lord Jesus.

Me either brother...
and I happen to think Winman has a very sound mind. :)

chette777 06-14-2009 07:38 PM

I refer winman and all viewers to the thread rightly dividing the book of Acts under the thread heading Doctrines, as the questions as to the different gospels and different ministries of Peter, Paul and the Lord Jesus has already been discussed there. do no need to repeat everything here.

now does any one have questions of Dispensationalism? which by the ways is not the same as Rightly Dividing, but those who rightly divide generally will hold to forms of dispensationalism.

Biblestudent 06-14-2009 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premio53 (Post 22140)
In the context it is obvious that Peter is talking about when Christ comes again, He will restore all things to their original perfection, before sin and the curse came into the world. Notice in verse 19 that Peter said "repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out." He did not add baptism showing it is not necessary fro salvation.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

I don't understand the obsession of trying to make Paul contradict Peter or Paul contradict the Lord Jesus.

premio53,
1. According to Peter, WHEN are sins going to be blotted out?
2. According to Paul, WHEN were sins forgiven?

The first question was left unanswered. Why?:confused:
Please

George 06-15-2009 11:49 AM

re: "Dispensationalism"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Winman (Post 22059)
Bro Parrish

"I also enjoyed those links. Now I understand some of the viewpoints of those I have been wrestling with here lately much better. I have been saying there is only one gospel, and Ruckman agrees.

Quote:

FALSE TEACHINGS OF HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISTS

PETER AND PAUL PREACHED "DIFFERENT" GOSPELS. If they did then Peter was cursed (Gal. 1:8-9). God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43, which he publicly acknowledges in Acts 15:11, while ALL ARE PRACTICING WATER BAPTISM.

I have been studying this on my own every night. And you know what? I came to the same conclusions as Ruckman.
"

Aloha brother Winman,

IF brother Peter Ruckman is correct, (you seem to agree with him - at least in this case) and IF it is true that: "God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43"; then the QUESTION arises - WHAT was Peter "preaching" between Acts Chapter 1 and Acts Chapter 10, IF he did NOT "know" the "Gospel" UNTIL Acts 10:43? :confused:

George 06-15-2009 02:11 PM

Re: "Dispensationalism"
 
Aloha all,

There have been many DispensationalSYSTEMS” proposed by NUMEROUS Dispensationalist authors. I do not believe that any ONE of these “SYSTEMS” is 100% “correct”.

I am “leery” of ALL systems of biblical interpretation and theological formulations – simply because I do not believe that any man can “box in” the Scriptures and make them always “FIT” into their “SYSTEM” (i.e. Calvin, Gill, Spurgeon, Bullinger, Stam, Ruckman, etc.).

The word “Dispensation” is used only four (4) times in the Holy Bible. Since I believe in “rightly dividing the word of truth”, that automatically places me in the “Dispensationalists Camp”. But I do NOT push “Dispensationalism” (a “system of biblical interpretation) – I try to emphasize the Holy Scriptures instead.

Since there are so FEW verses in the Bible with the word “dispensation” in them, when I teach about HOW God has dealt with men down though the ages; I prefer to emphasize God’s “COVENANTS” with men, rather than the “Dispensations” (since the word “dispensation” does NOT mean a period of time – as many Dispensationalists believe.)

There are many Dispensational “systems” and most of them are quite complex. I try to keep things simple (and at the same time “Biblical”), and so I have noticed that the one thing that is common in every single so-called “Dispensation” (or under every Covenant of God) is BELIEF and OBEDIENCE!

#1. In the Garden of Eden (Under the "Edenic" Covenant) - Adam was required to "believe" God (there was no "Faith" involved) and to obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Which Eve failed to do, and Adam (for Eve’s sake) joined her.}

#2. After the "Fall" (under the "Adamic" Covenant) - all that was required of people before the flood was for them to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Which by Noah's time - ONLY Noah did.}

#3. The same holds true for all those after the Flood under the "Noahic" Covenent. They were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Of whom Job would be the perfect “example”.}

#4. Under the "Abrahamic" Covenant - Abraham and all of his descendants were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Which Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did – and some of their descendants.}

#5. Under the "Mosaic" Covenant - Moses and all of the Israelites were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID – both ORALLY and in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which Moses did (except for striking the “rock” at Kadesh.)}

#6. Under the "Davidic" Covenant - David and all of his descendants were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID – both ORALLY and in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which David did except in the matter of Uriah & Bathsheba, and the numbering of the children of Israel.}

#7.
At the Lord Jesus Christ’s coming to Israel – the nation of Israel was obligated to "believe" the Son of God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID – ORALLY, and the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which Israel refused to do, but instead REJECTED Him and had Him KILLED!}

#7a.
At the Holy Spirit’s coming to Israel (at Pentecost) – the nation of Israel was obligated to "believe" the Apostles and Disciples (within whom the Holy Spirit dwelled) and obey them (i.e. WHAT THEY SAID – ORALLY, and the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which Israel refused to do, but instead REJECTED them (and the Holy Spirit living in them) and eventually started KILLING them – i.e. Stephen, James, etc.}

Upon the nation of Israel’s REJECTION of the entire Godhead, God turned to the Gentiles.

#7b. Under the “New Covenant" - Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ {all His "seed" – BOTH Jew & Gentile} are to "believe" God, and His Holy Apostles, and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {We are to simply BELIEVE the “Gospel” of the Grace of God (i.e. Paul’s “Gospel”) and “obey” God by receiving the Lord Jesus Christ as our personal Saviour – PLUS NOTHING!}

#8. In the Great Tribulation - Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are to "believe" God and obey Him. (i.e. WHAT HE SAID in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH and WHAT He; and the two witnesses; and the 144,000 ORALLY SPEAK.) {And they had better "overcome" and "endure to THE END"}

#9. In the Millennial Reign of Christ - People BETTER "believe" God and obey Him. (There will be no "faith" involved.) {The Lord Jesus Christ will RULE WITH A ROD OF IRON - There will be NO HUMANISTIC (Psychiatry/Psychology) EXCUSES THEN!}

#10. In Eternity – Everything will be “settled” and all will be well:

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.


Revelation 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.


Now I do not say that what I have presented can be called “Dispensations” and I am not trying to “set up” some “NEW SYSTEM”. What I have tried to do is understand HOW God has dealt with men in the past, and WHY He hasn’t always dealt with them in the same manner {although He has ALWAYS REQUIRED – “BELIEF” (in His “words”) and Obedience}.

I have found that the different “COVENANTS” that God made with men at different times in the history of mankind - best explain the “differences” in the way that God has dealt with men.

Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

chette777 06-15-2009 06:52 PM

George,

Can you explain the difference between the New Covenant found only 4 times in the Bible once in the OT and thrice in Hebrews only. And "New Testament" found only in the NT three times in the Gospel books and twice in Paul's writings and once in Hebrews.

What is the difference between a covenant and a testament? Newer translations change new testament to new covenant.

Great Study on Biblical dispensations

Jassy 06-15-2009 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 22227)
George,

Can you explain the difference between the New Covenant found only 4 times in the Bible once in the OT and thrice in Hebrews only. And "New Testament" found only in the NT three times in the Gospel books and twice in Paul's writings and once in Hebrews.

What is the difference between a covenant and a testament? Newer translations change new testament to new covenant.

Great Study on Biblical dispensations

Brother Chette,

I noticed your question to brother George. I hope I am not interrupting here, but regarding these differences between New Covenant and New Testament, there is something that I have noticed.

KJV: Matthew 26:28 - "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

Now if you look at this same scripture, in the corrupt New International Version (NIV), it reads: "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

The NIV leaves out "new testament." The NIV doesn't even call it a new covenant.

Covenant means "an agreement between two or more parties." Testament means "a will to go into force after death." Jesus died on the cross of Calvary for our sins. So it is a testament, going into force AFTER His death!

I hope this brief post is helpful. (And maybe brother George will be correcting me; I am always open to learning the truth.)

Jassy

George 06-16-2009 10:56 AM

rE: "Dispensationalism"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 22227)
George,

Can you explain the difference between the New Covenant found only 4 times in the Bible once in the OT and thrice in Hebrews only. And "New Testament" found only in the NT three times in the Gospel books and twice in Paul's writings and once in Hebrews.

What is the difference between a covenant and a testament? Newer translations change new testament to new covenant.

Great Study on Biblical dispensations


Aloha brother Chette,

Believe it or not - I never gave this issue much thought. :confused: I will look into it (when I find the time). In the meantime sister Jassy may be on to something:

A "Covenant" is an "agreement" between two parties {All of God's "Covenants" emanate ONLY from God - they are NOT agreements "hammered out" between two individuals}

A "Testament" is a "testimony" declaring the "WILL" of the "Testator".

Could it be: that the "New Testament" is God's declaration to the world - as to WHO the Lord Jesus Christ is; and WHAT He has DONE?

While the "New Covenant" would be God's NEW "covenant" with those individuals who have BELIEVED the RECORD in the "New Testament" and who have RECEIVED the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour?

Like I said, I haven't given the issue much thought, so I wouldn't take what I have said here as the "final word" from yours truly. Good question though. :)

Winman 06-16-2009 04:05 PM

Bro George asked

Quote:

Aloha brother Winman,

IF brother Peter Ruckman is correct, (you seem to agree with him - at least in this case) and IF it is true that: "God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43"; then the QUESTION arises - WHAT was Peter "preaching" between Acts Chapter 1 and Acts Chapter 10, IF he did NOT "know" the "Gospel" UNTIL Acts 10:43?
Some of these threads are overlapping. First, I do not agree with Ruckman that God taught Peter the gospel in Acts 10:43. What I agree with Ruckman on is that there is only one gospel.

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

And I believe the same gospel we have today started in the four gospels.

Matt 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

No mention of the restoration of the kingdom, it says Jesus shall save his people from their sins.

And Jesus clearly taught that he came to save those who were lost.

Matt 18:11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

Luke 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

And we all know John 3:16

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Jesus always taught that he came to save those which were lost in sin. I do not know of one verse where Jesus says he will restore the kingdom at "this time".

And Paul shows in Acts that John the Baptist taught the same gospel.

Acts 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

And Peter preached the forgiveness of sins through Christ.

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

I think it is very clear that starting with Matthew the scriptures show Jesus came to save those who were lost, and that by believeing on him we could have forgiveness of sins and everlasting life. There are many verses besides these I could show.

Winman 06-16-2009 04:42 PM

And what did Peter preach in Acts 10?

Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all: )
37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

1) The word was sent unto the children of Israel
2) This word began in Galilee after the baptism which John preached
3)They were commanded to teach Jesus was the Judge of the quick and dead
4) All the prophets gave witness through believeing on Jesus they would receive the remission of sins

Note that the these Gentiles received the Holy Ghost upon hearing the word of God and believeing. And that the Jews were astonished because they received the Holy Ghost "as well as we?"

I can't be dogmatic about this, but I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles.

But it is clear that the message was the forgiveness of sins upon believeing on Jesus, not the restoration of the kingdom.

chette777 06-16-2009 08:09 PM

Winamn,

You are misquoting Ruckman or at best you are twisting his words making him agree with you when he does in fact teach that John the Baptist, Peter taught a Gospel different than Paul BEFORE acts 10.

AFTER Acts 10 Peter is preaching the same a Paul and that is when there is only one Gospel for today is being taught.

I have some of his books. I have read sure word of Prophecy, his commentary of Acts, Hebrews, Genesis, Romans, General Epistles, Proverbs and Exodus. Also Black is Beautiful, Ruckman's Apocalypse.

so you can't fool me with your Misuse of the Ruckman statement.

When are we going to get that testimony BRO? WHO ARE YOU?

George 06-16-2009 09:46 PM

Re: "Dispensationalism"
 
Aloha brother Winman,

I do not refer to brother Peter Ruckman as an “authority” for anything, but since you introduced his “testimony” as being in support of your position of there being ONLY ONE “Gospel” - I must set the record straight.

Winman’s Post #13 > Dispensationalism
Quote:

Bro Parrish

I also enjoyed those links. Now I understand some of the viewpoints of those I have been wrestling with here lately much better. I have been saying there is only one gospel
, and Ruckman agrees.”

Ruckman’s Quote:
Quote:

FALSE TEACHINGS OF HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISTS

PETER AND PAUL PREACHED "DIFFERENT" GOSPELS. If they did then Peter was cursed (Gal. 1:8-9). God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43, which he publicly acknowledges in Acts 15:11, while ALL ARE PRACTICING WATER BAPTISM.

I have been studying this on my own every night. And you know what? I came to the same conclusions as Ruckman.”
First off your “conclusions” are faulty.

Peter Ruckman has NEVER taught that there has been ONLY ONE “Gospel”. Ruckman clearly says in the quote that you cited that: “God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43”, which clearly indicates that BEFORE Acts 10:43 Peter did NOT know the “Gospel” (“the Gospel of the Grace of God” – i.e. “Paul’s Gospel”).

Ruckman NEVER said “there is only one gospel”, as you “claim” (READ HIS “WORDS”). You are “reading into” what he clearly said - what you “think” he “meant”. Ruckman was pointing out the “False Teachings” of some Hyper-Dispensationalists which say that Peter and Paul “preached different Gospels” - AFTER Acts 10:43. It wasn’t until Acts 10:43 that Peter “learned” of the “Gospel of the Grace of God”, so HOW could he have possibly been preaching “the Gospel of the Grace of God BEFORE Acts 10:43 – IF he didn’t know it?

I gave away almost all of Ruckman’s Commentaries and books (that I owned) four years ago. If I still had his Commentaries on Matthew and Acts, and his book “the Sure Word of Prophecy” (formerly known as “The Kingdom of God vs. The Kingdom of heaven) I could point out to you where brother Peter Ruckman clearly taught that there is MORE than just ONE “Gospel”.

However, fortunately I still have his book “Bible Study Charts & Outlines” and I shall quote from page 55 of that book:
Quote:

In this age the only “GOOD NEWS” (GOSPEL) is the “Gospel of the Grace of God” (Acts 20:24). Every FALSE TEACHING in this age comes from diluting this Gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-5) with works of some kind (see Romans 4:1-8). Paul says a man is “ACCURSED” (Galatians 1:8-9) if he teaches Acts 2:38 or the “Sermon on the Mount” as a “PLAN OF SALVATION” (see Romans 10:1-14).

EVERY “HERESY IN THIS AGE COMES FROM FAILURE TO PUT A VERSE INTO ITS PROPER TIME PLACEMENT!

In speaking about the “Tribulation” Ruckman said:

Since this is not the time of the church’s trouble, but “the time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:7), The LAW COMES BACK INTO EFFECT (see Revelation 12:17 and 14:12) FOR ISRAEL (see Matthew 24:15, 20).

A man must “ENDURE UNTO THE END” (Matthew 24:13) and NOT TAKE “THE MARK” (Revelation 13:1-8, 12:10-12).

In this period, “The Gospel of the Grace of God” is NOT PREACHED. An “EVERLASTING GOSPEL” IS PREACHED to Gentiles (Revelation 14:6) and THE GOSPEL OF “THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN” IS PREACHED to Israel (see Matthew 24:13-15, 3:2, 4:17, 5:10, 19, 6:10, 7:21, 8:11, 10:7, 11:11, 13:11, 24). {Underlines are mine – G.A.}
Now, by my count – Peter Ruckman cited THREE (3 )“GOSPELS”:

#1. “The Gospel of the Grace of God”.

#2. An “EVERLASTING GOSPEL”.

#3. THE GOSPEL OF “THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN”.

You said: “I have been saying there is only one gospel, and Ruckman agrees.” Obviously “RUCKMAN DOES NOTAGREE”! (You misread and misinterpreted what he actually said.)

You Said: “I came to
the same conclusions as Ruckman.” Obviously you DID NOT! IF you had truly “reached the SAME CONCLUSIONS as Ruckman”, as you said, you would have had to “conclude” that there are MORE than ONE “Gospel”!

This is what comes of someone desperately searching for “something” – i.e. ANYTHING (or ANYONE) to support their “position” on a Biblical issue. If you had read Peter Ruckman’s words more carefully you would have seen that he did NOT SAY: “there is only one gospel”. If you had carefully researched some of Ruckman’s other books (articles, etc.) and done your “homework” on brother Ruckman’s position on this issue, you would NOT have enlisted him as being in “agreement” with you. Sadly, all I can say is that, this careless approach extends to many of your Posts regarding this issue.

Winman’s Post #32 > Dispensationalism
Quote:

First, I do not agree with Ruckman that God taught Peter the gospel in Acts 10:43. What I agree with Ruckman on is that there is only one gospel.”
In your Post #13 you said: “I came to the same conclusions as Ruckman.” After I pointed out WHAT Peter Ruckman actually said (and its implications) - you suddenly back away from your statement, and indicate that you did NOT reach ALL of “the same conclusions as Ruckman”. But that’s NOT what you said in your Post #13.

I have proven that Peter Ruckman NEVER said: “there is only one gospel”, as you claimed.

I have proven that Peter Ruckman does NOT “agree” with you – that “there is only one gospel”.

I have proven that Peter Ruckman believes there are at least Three (3)Gospels”.

I have proven that you have NOT come “to the SAME CONCLUSIONS as Ruckman”.

I am growing weary of disproving what you say. You are determined not to believe what I have presented here in this Thread. I have NO power over you, and I seek NO power over you. You are “free” to believe whatever you want to believe, but I would think at some point you might get tired of repeating the same arguments - taking the Scriptures out of “context” to prove your point; making the Scriptures “MEAN” something other than what they “SAY”; and now doing the same with what brother Peter Ruckman has said also.

I am going to proceed with the rest of my comments on the first few Chapters of the Book of Acts, and, if I find the time (or have the inclination) I may deal with some of your other Posts on this Thread; but it is pretty clear to me that we are never going to come to an agreement on this issue.

The question you should be asking yourself at this point is - WHY is it that you misquoted brother Ruckman. WHY did you take his words out of context? WHY did you twist his words around to “mean” something other than what they said? And WHY have you ignored most of the questions that I have posed to you on this Thread?

There is a distinct DIFFERENCE between the ways that the two of us approach the study of God’s Holy word.

You seek to “HARMONIZE” the Scriptures and MAKE them “MEAN” whatever you have predetermined you think they “MEAN”.

I seek to “RIGHTLY DIVIDE” the Scriptures and try to SEE where they FIT. I want to know WHAT God’s words SAY NOT WHAT THEY “MEAN”.

No where’s in the Holy Bible are we instructed to “HARMONIZE” the word of truth; on the contrary we are clearly told that we should be “rightly DIVIDING” the word of truth.

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

George 06-18-2009 11:31 AM

Re: " Dispensationalism"
 
Winman’s Post #33 > AV1611 Bible Forums > Doctrine > Dispensationalism
Quote:

Originally Posted by Winman (Post 22284)
And what did Peter preach in Acts 10?

Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all: )
37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

1) The word was sent unto the children of Israel
2) This word began in Galilee after the baptism which John preached
3)They were commanded to teach Jesus was the Judge of the quick and dead
4) All the prophets gave witness through believeing on Jesus they would receive the remission of sins

Note that the these Gentiles received the Holy Ghost upon hearing the word of God and believeing. And that the Jews were astonished because they received the Holy Ghost "as well as we?"

I can't be dogmatic about this, but I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles.

But it is clear that the message was the forgiveness of sins upon believeing on Jesus, not the restoration of the kingdom.

Aloha brother Winman,

Your above Post is a big disappointment to me because it does NOT “PROVE” that the Jews in Acts 2-7 were saved under “the Gospel of the Grace of God”. (You are attempting to HARMONIZE the words of God here.) What the Scriptures that you cited do PROVE is that the CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER of RECEIVING the Holy Spirit was entirely “DIFFERENT” from how the Jews in Acts 2:37-38 RECEIVED the Holy Spirit and how the Gentiles RECEIVED the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:44.
Quote:

Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The order in Acts 2:38 is:

#1.
REPENT
{Of WHAT? Of having crucified their Lord and Christ}

#2. Be BAPTIZED
{In water - for WHAT? - “for the remission of sins”}

#3. Ye shall RECEIVE the GIFT of the HOLY GHOST
{WHEN will they RECEIVE the HOLY SPIRIT? – Only AFTER they “REPENT” and are “BAPTIZED” (in water) – NOT BEFORE!}


It’s as easy as 1 – 2 - 3; unless you want to “PROVE” otherwise!

And what about the SAMARITANS (part Jew – the descendants of the 10 Tribes of Israel) in Acts Chapter 8? {I’m getting ahead of myself on my Thread: “Rightly Dividing the Book of Acts”}
Quote:

Acts 8:5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.
6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and
seeing the miracles which he did.
7 For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were possessed with them: and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were healed.
8 And there was great joy in that city.
9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.

12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptizedin the name of the Lord Jesus.)

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
I shall expound on these verses later, (in the Thread: “Rightly Dividing the Book of Acts”) but right now please notice the CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER for the SAMARITANS (part Jew – the descendants of the 10 Tribes of Israel)

The order in Acts 8:12-17 is:

#1. They BELIEVED
{The “THINGS” concerning the KINGDOM OF GOD. They did NOT have to REPENT (of anything) – because they did NOT "consent" to the Lord Jesus Christ’s death!}

#2. They were BAPTIZED
{In water – For WHAT? Notice the OMISSION of: “for the remission of sins”. They were NOT GUILTY of REJECTING Israel's Messiah & King.}

#3. They RECEIVED the HOLY SPIRIT
{AFTER they were BAPTIZED – but ONLY AFTER the Apostles laid their hands on them.}

Notice the DIFFERENCE? We are commanded to rightly DIVIDE the word of truth – There is a DIFFERENCE!

And now on to Acts Chapter 10:
Quote:

Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
The order in Acts 10:44-48 is:

#1. They HEARD the “word”

#2. They BELIEVED

#3. They RECEIVED the HOLY SPIRIT

#4. They were BAPTIZED – in water

What was that that the Apostle Paul said?

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Romans 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.


This is the “ORDER” of “the Gospel of the Grace of God” (i.e. Paul’s “Gospel”), which ASTONISHED Peter and the Jews that were with him (because up to this moment they DID NOT KNOW IT!) And the only thing that CONVINCED Peter (and the Jews that with him) that these Gentiles had ALREADY RECEIVED the GIFT of the HOLY SPIRIT (WITHOUT water Baptism and WITHOUT the laying on of hands) was the EVIDENCE of the Gentiles speaking in tongues.

Remember: “The Jews REQUIRE a SIGN” [1Corinthians 1:22], and “tongues are for a SIGN” [1Corinthians 14:22].

Up until this moment SIGNS, MIRACLES, and HEALING had been an INTEGRAL PART of the preaching of the Apostles and Disciples. That is - the Jews (and the Samaritans) actually SAW PHYSICAL SIGNS and MIRACLES along with the preaching of the word of God. But in Acts Chapter 10, the Gentiles – only HEARD (the “word”) and they BELIEVED (WITHOUT the SIGNS or MIRACLES).

This was something DIFFERENT from what Peter (and the Jews that were with him) was used to. All during the Lord Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry Peter had observed SIGNS and MIRACLES being performed by the Lord (and the Disciples, themselves, also performed some signs, miracles, and healings). After the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and up to this point in time, SIGNS, MIRACLES, and HEALINGS had been an INTEGRAL PART of the preaching of the Apostles and Disciples – the reason being is: “THE JEWS REQUIRE A SIGN” (in order to BELIEVE) – and the Holy Spirit had OBLIGED them!

Then what was DIFFERENT now (at this place, and at this point in time)? The Gentiles did NOTrequire a sign” (in order to believe) – they HEARD (God’s “words”) and BELIEVED (WITHOUT SIGNS) and so God blessed them for their “FAITH” and gave them the GIFT of the Holy Spirit WITHOUT water Baptism, and WITHOUT the laying on of hands.

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

The purpose of the SIGN of the “gift of tongues” was NOT to CONVINCE the Gentiles to BELIEVE (they ALREADY BELIEVED). The purpose of the SIGN of “the gift of tongues” was to CONVINCE Peter (and the Jews that were with him) that these Gentiles were indeed saved (just like the Jews), but WITHOUT the necessity of water Baptism or the laying on of hands!

For you to say: ”I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles.”is a flagrant abuse of the Scriptures – in the face of the clearly written testimony. You have openly CHANGED God’s Holy words in order to support your personal private beliefs!

The Biblical testimony clearly states:
Quote:

Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

In order for those Jews (at this point in time) to RECEIVE the “gift of the Holy Ghost”, they would have had to: REPENT (1st.); and then be BAPTIZED (in water – 2nd.). There is NO WAY that they would have RECEIVED the Holy Spirit just by BELIEVING Peter’s “words”! You CAN NOT MAKE Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:44 the SAME – WITHOUT CHANGING THE HOLY WORDS OF GOD - AS THEY ARE WRITTEN AND RECORDED IN THE KING JAMES BIBLE!

I am absolutely amazed at the lengths that “Christians” will go to, in order to justify and support their beliefs! It is obvious, to genuine Bible believers, that “speculation” and “supposition” should play no part in determining sound Bible doctrine; but the twisting of the Holy words of God, and the wresting of verses of Scripture out of their “context” – in order to “prove a point”, is a perverse practice that no sincere Bible believer should ever engage in.

2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

2 Corinthians 4:1 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not;
2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.


Psalms 33:4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth.

Winman 06-18-2009 02:35 PM

Bro George

I am also amazed at your beliefs. I could very well also accuse you of going to lengths to prove your own personal interpretation. For instance, you say the signs and miracles were only for the Jews. There are exceptions to this that argue against you.

Acts 14:5 And when there was an assault made both of the Gentiles, and also of the Jews with their rulers, to use them despitefully, and to stone them,
6 They were ware of it, and fled unto Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and unto the region that lieth round about:
7 And there they preached the gospel.
8 And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in his feet, being a cripple from his mother's womb, who never had walked:
9 The same heard Paul speak: who stedfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed,
10 Said with a loud voice, Stand upright on thy feet. And he leaped and walked.
11 And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.
12 And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.

13 Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people.
14 Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,
15 And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein:
16 Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways.
17 Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.
18 And with these sayings scarce restrained they the people, that they had not done sacrifice unto them.

And in Acts 28

Acts 28:1 And when they were escaped, then they knew that the island was called Melita.
2 And the barbarous people shewed us no little kindness: for they kindled a fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain, and because of the cold.
3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand.
4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live.
5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm.
6 Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.


Now, in both these instances we have Gentiles who were convinced by miracles that Paul was a god (in their belief). Now, we do not know for absolute certain that these people got saved, but I think the chances are very good. I would imagine they would have listened to every word Paul told them after seeing these miracles.

And you completely misrepresented what I said here;

Quote:

For you to say: ”I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles.”is a flagrant abuse of the Scriptures – in the face of the clearly written testimony. You have openly CHANGED God’s Holy words in order to support your personal private beliefs!
You left out the most important part of this statement I made. Here is what I said.

Quote:


I can't be dogmatic about this, but I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles.
So, Bro George, you completely misrepresented what I said. I said I believed these verses to be a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing the word of God and were baptized later, but I made it perfectly clear that I was not absolutely certain.

Bro George, I am not going to keep debating this subject. I have presented my case with scriptures for all to see and decide for themselves. It is obvious we are not going to agree, so there is not much sense in going further.

Winman 06-18-2009 04:04 PM

Bro George, you also said;

Quote:

In order for those Jews (at this point in time) to RECEIVE the “gift of the Holy Ghost”, they would have had to: REPENT (1st.); and then be BAPTIZED (in water – 2nd.). There is NO WAY that they would have RECEIVED the Holy Spirit just by BELIEVING Peter’s “words”! You CAN NOT MAKE Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:44 the SAME – WITHOUT CHANGING THE HOLY WORDS OF GOD - AS THEY ARE WRITTEN AND RECORDED IN THE KING JAMES BIBLE!

You think I have some erroneous view that the Jews could receive the Holy Ghost without being baptized. But I have scripture to back this belief.

John 7:37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

You see, not one mention of having to be baptized here, these scriptures clearly say the Holy Ghost should be received by those who BELIEVE. And the Lord was speaking to Jews here. And the only reason mentioned that they had not already received the Holy Ghost simply by believeing is that Jesus was not yet glorified.

I do not appreciate you and others accusing me of twisting or changing God's Word, or of failing to rightly divide. I have provided very straightforward and clear scriptures to support everything I believe.

George 06-18-2009 04:38 PM

Re: "Dispensationalism"
 
Aloha brother Winman,

You said:
Quote:

"I am also amazed at your beliefs. I could very well also accuse you of going to lengths to prove your own personal interpretation. For instance, you say the signs and miracles were only for the Jews. There are exceptions to this that argue against you."
You could accuse me of ANYTHING (accusations are EASY); but can you PROVE your accusations - as I just have in my Posts #25, #35, and #36; most of which you have completely IGNORED. (see Post #35 on your "claims" and Ruckman's actual teachings. What NO Comment?)

Could you point out where I said: "signs and miracles were only for the Jews"? I said "the Jews REQUIRE A SIGN"; because that's what it says in 1Corinthians 1:22. In my Thread on "Rightly Dividing the Book of Acts" > Post #65 I said:
Quote:

Paul truly had “the SIGNS of an Apostle” [2Corinthians 12:12] for several reasons:

1. To convince the other Apostles and the Lord’s Disciples that he (Paul) was a genuine Apostle.

2. To prove his “Apostleship” to unbelievers {Apostles were supposed to have “signs”.}.

3. To prove he was a genuine Hebrew Apostle to the Jews who were “scattered abroad” in the various cities where Paul preached (always “to the Jew FIRST, and also to the Greek” i.e. Gentile) [Romans 1:16; 2:10]. You see, the Jewsrequire a sign” [1Corinthians 1:22] and God was obligated to give them signs. So as Paul went from town to town and city to city, he always went to the Jews’ synagogues FIRST. God’s “commission” to Paul was that he was to go “to the Jew FIRST”, and so God gave Paul the “signs of an apostle” to PROVE to those Jews (that were scattered abroad) that he was, indeed, truly an Apostle from God.
Does my "reason" Number 2: {"To prove his “Apostleship” to unbelievers {Apostles were supposed to have “signs”.} LIMIT Paul's "SIGNS" to just the Jewish UNBELIEVERS? Did I say that or even "intimate" it? This is what bothers me with how you "handle" words; both God's "WORDS" and my words. I NEVER said that the "signs and miracles were only for the Jews". And yet you say that I did. You should be able to cite "Thread" & Post Number - IF I said it. WHERE IS IT?

"The Jews require a sign" - the Gentiles DON'T "require" a sign. It's that simple. The Apostles (and some of the Disciples) had "Signs" and extraordinary "Gifts". Were these Signs, Miracles, and Healings ONLY for the Jews, anyone familiar with the Scriptures knows the answer is NO they were NOT! BUT the Jews legitimately REQUIRED "SIGNS" (to Believe), whereas the Gentiles DID NOT!

Winman said:
Quote:

"And you completely misrepresented what I said here;

For you to say
:
George's quote:
Quote:

Quoting Winman: ”I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles.” is a flagrant abuse of the Scriptures – in the face of the clearly written testimony. You have openly CHANGED God’s Holy words in order to support your personal private beliefs!
Winman said:
"You left out the most important part of this statement I made. Here is what I said.
I can't be dogmatic about this, but I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles.

So, Bro George, you completely misrepresented what I said. I said I believed these verses to be a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing the word of God and were baptized later, but I made it perfectly clear that I was not absolutely certain.
"
If your "not absolutely certain" about "a strong argument" in favor of your "private interpretation" - then WHY did you bring it up in the first place? I didn't "misrepresent" anything. I included your complete Post #33, which included the complete quote, in my Post #36. The most important part of your statement was NOT where you said: "I can't be dogmatic about this"; it was WHAT you said thereafter: "I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles." The most important part of your statement was NOT the fact that you couldn't be "dogmatic" about it - it was the fact that in SPECULATING about a private interpretation of Scripture, you IGNORED the very "words" of God, and MADE THEM SAY SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAID!

Whether you were being "DOGMATIC" or not, was NOT nearly as important as the fact that you twisted and wrested the Holy words of God to "FIT" your preconceived beliefs. IF you were not sure of what you believe WHY propose it as: "a strong argument" in favor of your private interpretation? WHY not leave all "SPECULATION" out of your defense of your personal beliefs, instead of stating that you believe you have "a strong argument" in favor of them; and when someone points out your fallacious thinking and your misuse of the Holy words of God - you suddenly "Crawfish" out of it by emphasizing the fact that you weren't being "dogmatic" about it in the first place?

You did say: "I believe this is a strong argument that the Jews in early Acts received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing the word of God, and were baptized afterward, just as these Gentiles." Didn't you? I clearly demonstrated in my Post #36 that what you said is absolutely FALSE - that is if you believe the Scriptures AS THEY ARE WRITTEN, and NOT AS YOU "PRIVATELY INTERPRET" THEM!

Winman said:
Quote:

"Bro George, I am not going to keep debating this subject. I have presented my case with scriptures for all to see and decide for themselves. It is obvious we are not going to agree, so there is not much sense in going further."
I'm happy for that. Maybe I can now proceed without you naysaying, nitpicking, and straining at gnats every time I make a Post on this issue. :(

Winman 06-18-2009 05:10 PM

Quote:


Could you point out where I said: "signs and miracles were only for the Jews"? I said "the Jews REQUIRE A SIGN"; because that's what it says in 1Corinthians 1:22. In my Thread on "Rightly Dividing the Book of Acts" > Post #65 I said:

You may not have absolutely said that signs and miracles were only for the Jews, but I would say you implied it. You said;

Quote:


Remember: “The Jews REQUIRE a SIGN” [1Corinthians 1:22], and “tongues are for a SIGN” [1Corinthians 14:22].

Up until this moment SIGNS, MIRACLES, and HEALING had been an INTEGRAL PART of the preaching of the Apostles and Disciples. That is - the Jews (and the Samaritans) actually SAW PHYSICAL SIGNS and MIRACLES along with the preaching of the word of God. But in Acts Chapter 10, the Gentiles – only HEARD (the “word”) and they BELIEVED (WITHOUT the SIGNS or MIRACLES).

That's pretty strong if you ask me.

And the reason I said I could not be dogmatic about the Jews receiving the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing only is Acts 2:38

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

I will admit that this verse can easily be understood to be Peter teaching the Jews to repent, and be baptized for the the remission of sins, and then receiving the Holy Ghost. It can be read that way.

But there are many other verses that in my opinion clarify what Peter was really teaching.

John 7:37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Now, when you read John 7:37-38, Acts 2:38 takes on a new meaning. Here in John, Jesus himself clearly says that he that believeth shall receive the Holy Ghost. And the only reason mentioned that believers had not yet received the Holy Ghost is that Jesus was not yet glorified.

Not one single mention of being baptized here. Not one single mention of repenting of killing Jesus (yes, I realize he was not crucified yet).

You and others are always accusing me of not rightly dividing the word of truth, but in my opinion, it is you that is in error. There are quite a few verses besides John 7:37-38 to support the belief that the Jews received the Holy Ghost by hearing and believeing without baptism. And the verses in Acts 10 are an example.

Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

You see, I do not have any conflicts. Everything I believe fits without having to weave and bob.

And how about those in Acts 2?

Acts 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

I see no mention of preaching the repentance of killing Jesus and the requirement to be baptized to receive the Holy Ghost here. These were all believers, and it is most likely that all had been baptized. But not necessarily, we do not know for sure. But we do see them all filled with the Holy Ghost, with no mention of this preaching the repentance of killing Jesus, or the requirement to be baptized.

I don't know what else to say. I think it is so very clear, I do not see how you can disregard so many scriptures that argue in my favor, and against yours.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Website © AV1611.Com.
Posts represent only the opinions of users of this forum and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the webmaster.

Software for Believing Bible Study