AV1611 Bible Forum Archive

AV1611 Bible Forum Archive (https://av1611.com/forums/index.php)
-   Doctrine (https://av1611.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   http://www.av-1611.com ? ? (https://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1440)

pneuby 07-10-2009 07:57 AM

http://www.av-1611.com ? ?
 
I'm concerned about 'some' of the doctrine I've found on this site, and I wondered if anyone of you were familiar with them. Since there is more than a few hourse of reading here, I'll point you to this page, specifically....

http://www.av-1611.com/Key_Understanding_Bible.htm

Quote:

Thus we see that the Word of God itself provides us with the key to its own proper understanding and right division:

Time Past: In Matthew through John we find the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ to the nation Israel. In the book of Acts we have the fall of Israel and salvation going to the Gentiles through the ministry of the Apostle Paul.

But Now: Romans through Philemon provide the doctrine for the present dispensation of grace.

Ages To Come: Hebrews through Revelation focus on the ages to come when God will bring to fruition His purposes for both the nation Israel and the Body of Christ.

We are not the only people in the programs and purposes of God. People in other ages need Scripture to instruct them in the specifics of God's dealings with them just as we do. Remember: All of the Bible is for us but it is not all to us nor is it all about us. If we fail to recognize this important fact we will never be able to properly understand just what God is doing today nor will we know just what He would have us do.

Thus it is in Paul's writings alone that we find the doctrine, position, walk and destiny of the Body of Christ.

mjf 07-10-2009 08:06 AM

av1611.com != av-1611.com

Diligent 07-10-2009 08:16 AM

I don't see anything wrong with the snippet you quoted, but of course I am not reading the totality of their statement. I suppose it could morph into hyperdispensationalist teaching from there, but I have not read the full article so I do not know.

But, regardless: av-1611.com is not affiliated in any way with this site, which is av1611.com. If you have questions for them (or whomever runs that site), you'll need to take it there.

Bro. Parrish 07-10-2009 09:14 AM

Hello pneuby,

The ground has been scorched here lately on some of this, so I will merely repeat what I have stated on other threads, this may help you better understand when you come across something like that...

The replies you get will differ because there are different views on it among KJV believers. There are good people on different sides of this. I think you will find that there are several levels of dispensational doctrine being taught here.

For example, some reject all dispensational teaching. On the other hand I think most of us are going to subscribe to a "moderate" dispensational teaching. Then there are also a few on here that in my opinion go beyond that into the realm of Hyperdispensationalism or Ultra-dispensationalism. The errors of Bullingerism should also be something believers should be aware of. For more on that here are a few articles for your review:
http://cnonline.net/~rkmiller/ultrad...m-ironside.htm
http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/hy...tionalism.html

On the other hand, according to a recent poll, I think most believers on this board, including the owner, are in support of the ordinances like water baptism for believers (a few are not but they are not bad people by any means). I think for the most part we have all tried to avoid the division this can create, while still allowing for some discussion. It is safe to say we ALL have disagreed with each other on SOME issues, at SOME time. But to me that is not a bad thing as long as it doesn't get out of control. I think God's people should be able to disagree on things without attacking each other personally.

Sometimes dispensationalism can be a divisive issue for Christians. But all of this in no way impacts our full support for the authority of the King James Bible, and even though we all may squabble from time to time on some issues, the heart of the forum is the inerrancy of the King James Bible and I can tell you that we all rally together as brothers (and sisters) to defend it when needed. My personal suggestion is that you search past threads here for a while on this issue until you get the lay of the land. In the end, each believer will have to search the scriptures and make up their own mind.

peopleoftheway 07-10-2009 11:58 AM

Brother If you aren't practising animal sacrifices for sin covering and relying on the shed blood of a risen and glorified Saviour then your a dispensationalist.

chette777 07-10-2009 06:00 PM

While their statement does Justice to defining the NT dispensations by book division. it looks similar to Doug Stoufer's outline of NT book divisions.

But those dispensations cannot be so cut and dry either. and because of that as was mentioned earlier could morph into over division or hyper-dispensationalism.

tonybones2112 07-10-2009 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pneuby (Post 23619)
I'm concerned about 'some' of the doctrine I've found on this site, and I wondered if anyone of you were familiar with them. Since there is more than a few hourse of reading here, I'll point you to this page, specifically....

http://www.av-1611.com/Key_Understanding_Bible.htm

Since Pastor Jordan is a personal friend of mine and we agree on about 99 percent of Biblical doctrine, what are your "concerns" Pneuby?

Thanks for the link, BTW.

Grace and peace

Tony

Steve Schwenke 07-10-2009 09:11 PM

the site in question is definitely hyper-dispensational and dry-cleaning! be careful!

Luke 07-11-2009 02:55 AM

Every single one of us on here are "dry cleaners" unless you think Baptism does some kind of spiritual cleaning ala Campbellites, aka Water dogs. When you were saved, you were made clean without water, by the Holy Spirit.

Steve Schwenke 07-11-2009 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke (Post 23671)
Every single one of us on here are "dry cleaners" unless you think Baptism does some kind of spiritual cleaning ala Campbellites, aka Water dogs. When you were saved, you were made clean without water, by the Holy Spirit.

Not exactly how I have seen the term used before. I meant dry-cleaners in the sense that they don't administer the NT ordinance of baptism AT ALL. Baptism is an ORDINANCE not a sacrament. It is something we do out of obedience to the scripture for no other reason than to obey the Scripture. It has nothing to do with salvation.
But if you know your church history, you know that the Baptists were persecuted heavily by the protestants for insisting on baptism AFTER salvation, and not in connection with salvation. Our position implicated their doctrine as false, since by default, baby-sprinklers are forced to admit that baptism is connected to salvation, and that it is not necessary after salvation. WE have lost our sense of history because of our political freedoms.

Bro. Parrish 07-11-2009 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Schwenke (Post 23682)
Not exactly how I have seen the term used before. I meant dry-cleaners in the sense that they don't administer the NT ordinance of baptism AT ALL. Baptism is an ORDINANCE not a sacrament. It is something we do out of obedience to the scripture for no other reason than to obey the Scripture. It has nothing to do with salvation.
But if you know your church history, you know that the Baptists were persecuted heavily by the protestants for insisting on baptism AFTER salvation, and not in connection with salvation. Our position implicated their doctrine as false, since by default, baby-sprinklers are forced to admit that baptism is connected to salvation, and that it is not necessary after salvation. WE have lost our sense of history because of our political freedoms.

Excellent post brother Schwenke. :amen:

chette777 07-11-2009 06:34 PM

We try and keep our doctrines in line with what Paul teaches. If Jesus, John the Baptist, James and Peter teaches something, doctrine, baptism. I Will find scriptures where Paul teaches the same thing, then I make it a doctrine for the church. If not then I might find it as an application but not a doctrines. Paul does not teach Baptism as an ordinance.

Roms 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:


Paul teaches Baptism is an act of Identification of the believer with Christ. Just as Christ was baptized in the identification of sinners. Who were taught by John the Baptist to repent and be baptized for the remissions of sins. Jesus Identified himself with sinners in Johns Baptism and Paul taught we are baptized in His likeness. the water baptism is just an outward show of identification.

Christ had no sins so why be baptized? Identification an outward show. it was all part of God the Father overall plan for him to be in the likeness of sinful man that he might fulfill the purpose of death for the forgiveness of sins for all men. John said to him it is you who should baptize me. and he is right the baptism for the remission of John;s sins. but Christ said to let it be

Matt 3:13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.


Seeing Christ took time to show his identification with man through water baptism we should too. and we need no ordinance for that. it is something each man must be convinced by the Holy Ghost to do and not by rule or regulation of ordinances to enforce this. for Baptism today is not an act of obedience unless you place them under a Kingdom Gospel instead of the Gospel of Grace.

Paul's teaching under the Gospel of grace has baptism as an identification not an ordinance to follow.

Steve Schwenke 07-11-2009 07:33 PM

Chette, I agree in principle with your last post. I think the word we are having trouble with is "ordinance."
By ordinance, I simply mean that this is something that we observe out of obedience to Scripture. Websters 1828:

1. a rule established by authority; a permanent rule of action.
2. Observance commanded
3. Appointment
4. Established rite or ceremony

Thus Baptism is a permanent rule of action, in that the "rule" from Scripture is that believers WERE baptized after salvation. The examples are clear for us that we baptize believers. It is an established "rite"; it is a permanent rule of action. Maybe that clarifies things for you? Other than that, I am not sure what the disagreement is about, if there is any!

In Christ

Jassy 07-11-2009 11:34 PM

I believe from the Bible teachings BEFORE Paul, that water baptism was a ritual that started with John the Baptist. It was an outward showing of an inward conversion. And it was taught to be necessary. Indeed, even Jesus Christ was baptized (although He, of course, had no need of it!).

It was primarily the JEWS that were initially the early converts and they were baptized because Jesus and the original apostles were preaching primarily to these Jews. So baptism for the Jews was FOR the purpose of repentance and washing away of sins. It was actually symbolic of that and the death and resurrection of Christ.

In Paul's writings, he did not show water baptism to be vital or necessary for salvation. Sure, there is nothing wrong with baptism - it's perfectly fine if a believer wishes to be baptized. I see nothing wrong with that from the Bible. Yet Paul did not make baptism a requirement. Additionally, the Bible talks of the baptism of the Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost). This is what I believe happens to EVERY believer, at the moment they have faith an believe in Jesus Christ's death, burial, resurrection and ascension. When they truly believe that, then they are "baptized" by the Holy Spirit, into the Body of Christ.

I don't believe that anyone can point to any Scriptures after the NEW teachings of Paul (salvation by GRACE and not by LAW or WORKS), that make water baptism MANDATORY for any believer.

Again, I am not against baptism - I myself was baptized by immersion. I think that many church denominations today teach it as a required ritual. It's not.

Jassy

chette777 07-12-2009 01:04 AM

I didn't mean to hijack this post I was using baptism as an example about doctrines so that if the books being divided right would reveal what is in line with Paul's teachings

NO where in scripture does John the Baptist ever teach Baptism is an outward showing of an inward conversion. it does in fact being a step of obedience if they believed his words, repent and then be baptized FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS. no grace applied until the act of obedience is carried out by the believer in the Kingdom Gospel.

Paul teaches nothing on water baptism. Paul's only remarks are who he baptized. Are example is he baptized. Roms 6 is actually spiritual. But we use those words to show our Identification with Christ which is an outward show of what God has done in our hearts. Buried in his likeness of death, raised in his newness of life. Paul taught "Baptismal Identification in Christ" now there is a Biblical doctrine we can follow. no need for the word ordinance to connected to it when in fact the Bible does not use it in connection to Baptism.

ordinance should be discussed in the other thread "Ordinances". sorry for the hijack

Luke 07-12-2009 02:46 AM

I agree with Chette on this one. We do it, but it's not a "step of obedience" or "ordinance" and especially not a sacrament (but no one has said that). We don't see Paul commanding baptism by water immersion, even though he did baptize some of his converts, though only a few.

pneuby 07-12-2009 09:02 AM

I had a whole post ready to go, and the confounded board timed-out on me, or something!:eek:

Anyhow, I have NOT confused that site with your's, to be clear. My main concern is that they seem to assert that only the Pauline letters are FOR the Church today, in this dispensation of Grace. That anything from Hebrews, forward, is for Jews in the end times.:confused:

Clearly, however, the letters from Peter, James, John, and Jude are to, and FOR believers, yes? :)

George 07-12-2009 12:56 PM

Re: "http://www.av-1611.com ? ?"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pneuby (Post 23777)
I had a whole post ready to go, and the confounded board timed-out on me, or something!:eek:

Anyhow, I have NOT confused that site with your's, to be clear. My main concern is that they seem to assert that only the Pauline letters are FOR the Church today, in this dispensation of Grace. That anything from Hebrews, forward, is for Jews in the end times.:confused:

Clearly, however, the letters from Peter, James, John, and Jude are to, and FOR believers, yes? :)


Aloha brother,

Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

{The Scriptures "were written for our learning".}

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

{"All Scripture is profitable."}

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.


{We are told to rightly divide "the word of truth" - NOT rightly divide the Books of the Bible}

Read the "introduction" to the Book of James: [James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting."] Obviously James main address is TO "the twelve tribes (of Israel) scattered abroad". The Books of Hebrews, James, I & II Peter, I, II, & III John, Jude, and Revelation may be for the saints in the future (after the "translation" of the church), but any teaching within those Books that line up with Paul's teaching in his Epistles are for us, just as any teaching within the Old Testament or the Four Gospels that line up with Paul's teachings is also for us.

In other words - the entire Bible has been written FOR us (for our learning), but the entire Bible is NOT written TO us; and it is our job to rightly divide "the word of truth" to determine WHAT applies to the church (and the Christian); and what applies to Israel (Hebrews/Jews) in the time past and in the future.

1 Corinthians 10:6
Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.
7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.
8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.
9 Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.
10 Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.
11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Jassy 07-12-2009 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23761)
I didn't mean to hijack this post I was using baptism as an example about doctrines so that if the books being divided right would reveal what is in line with Paul's teachings

NO where in scripture does John the Baptist ever teach Baptism is an outward showing of an inward conversion. it does in fact being a step of obedience if they believed his words, repent and then be baptized FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS. no grace applied until the act of obedience is carried out by the believer in the Kingdom Gospel.

Paul teaches nothing on water baptism. Paul's only remarks are who he baptized. Are example is he baptized. Roms 6 is actually spiritual. But we use those words to show our Identification with Christ which is an outward show of what God has done in our hearts. Buried in his likeness of death, raised in his newness of life. Paul taught "Baptismal Identification in Christ" now there is a Biblical doctrine we can follow. no need for the word ordinance to connected to it when in fact the Bible does not use it in connection to Baptism.

ordinance should be discussed in the other thread "Ordinances". sorry for the hijack

Brother Chette,

Thank you for the points that you made. You are correct and I appreciate the correction.

Jassy

pneuby 07-12-2009 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George (Post 23787)
{We are told to rightly divide "the word of truth" - NOT rightly divide the Books of the Bible}

Well, I agree with that. And giving them the benefit of the doubt, they seem to make that pretty simplistic point of cut-off. That is, Hebrews to Revelation is NOT for the 'church'.

James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. 2 My brethern

That term 'brethern' is used over an over in reference to BELIEVERS. In 2:1 "My brethern, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ...with respect of persons." Certainly unbelieving Jews did NOT have the faith of Jesus?

1 Peter 1) "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ , to the...2) ELECT according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit..." Certainly unbelieving Jews were not sanctified, that's addressed to believers.

2 Peter 1) "...To them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.". Sounds again like believers, to me.

1 John 2 24) " Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning, ..ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father. 25) And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life. " WHO alone receives eternal life after trusting upon Jesus?

Jude 1) ".. to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called. "

From what I've read in those letters, they are directed To, and FOR, believers, be they be formally Jews...still believers.

Am I missing something?:)



Quote:

Obviously James main address is TO "the twelve tribes (of Israel) scattered abroad". The Books of Hebrews, [/COLOR]James, I & II Peter, I, II, & III John, Jude, and Revelation may be for the saints in the future (after the "translation" of the church),

In other words - the entire Bible has been written FOR us (for our learning), but the entire Bible is NOT written TO us; and it is our job to rightly divide "the word of truth" to determine WHAT applies to the church (and the Christian); and what applies to Israel (Hebrews/Jews) in the time past and in the future.
.

chette777 07-12-2009 06:46 PM

It is not an issue of who it is for or not for. the issue is who is it written to.

All scripture is for our learning, there may not be doctrine for the church in some but there is application. I said above how I determine doctrine and that without limiting the rest of the Bible.

ALL The word is important. you don't see the Hypers just printing out Bibles with only the letters of Paul for their members to use. if you will follow one of the members posts who is hyper you will notice he uses the other books just to prove what is not for the church today according to their understanding.

Is that how we are to use scriptures?

Is that what the Lord says how the word of God is to be used?

NO and without posting the scripture addresses the Word of God is to edify, it is to cause growth, it is to help keep one from sin, is is to encourage, it is for admonition, for learning, to bring joy to ones heart, it is to nurish, it is to cleans, it is to point the way to Jesus Christ, and it is to glorify God and Christ.

Biblestudent 07-12-2009 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Schwenke (Post 23658)
the site in question is definitely hyper-dispensational and dry-cleaning! be careful!

Brother Steve Schwenke,
Does that imply that some are "hyper-dispensatonal" and not "dry-cleaning"? I am not a dry cleaner, although some may mistake me for a "hyper"(?).

larryb 07-14-2009 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peopleoftheway (Post 23637)
Brother If you aren't practising animal sacrifices for sin covering and relying on the shed blood of a risen and glorified Saviour then your a dispensationalist.

Quite a mischaracterization since Covenantal Theology does not promote the practice of animal sacrifice.

One must be careful to read distinctions in the Scripture where they are warranted. There is a difference between the shadows of the OT that pointed to Christ (e.g. animal sacrifices), which were ceremonial laws...and the moral laws as summed up in the 10 commandments, which are still in effect in the new administration of the covenant of grace.

larryb 07-14-2009 08:18 PM

The Gospeel was also preached to Abraham...

Gal 3:8 - And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed

Other things to consider...

Gal 3:17 - And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

1 Pet 3:18-20
For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 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.

chette777 07-14-2009 08:24 PM

actually Paul only restated 9 of the ten commandments. The one he didn't restate for us is Sabbath observance. read the way Paul restates the 9 commandments as not to make them required law but spiritually applicable.

LarryB, the gospel preached to Abraham in the OT was not the Gospel of Grace, but it was a gospel. reread Genesis 12, 15, 18 and you will see the gospel there was "the nations would be blessed through his seed". but no where is it ever said faith alone in Christ for the forgiveness of sins. there are many gospels (good news) but only one gospel of grace and only found in the new testament.

Paul reminds us in Galatians That it is Jesus of the seed of Abraham in which all nations would be blessed. Paul like us today is looking back with the info he has at hand. just as we have a tendency to do. we need to be careful not to impose on the OT something that is not there just as Paul did. Paul did not impose the Gospel of Grace he only pointed out the fulfilling of the blessing of all nations is through Jesus Christ.

larryb 07-14-2009 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23967)
actually Paul only restated 9 of the ten commandments. The one he didn't restate for us is Sabbath observance. read the way Paul restates the 9 commandments as not to make them required law but spiritually applicable.

The Scriptures never tell us that only repeated moral commands are still in force...that's pure presumption.
And if that was the case, since the prohibition against beastiality is not made in the NT your logic would lead us to think that it was no longer against God's moral commands.


Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23967)
LarryB, the gospel preached to Abraham in the OT was not the Gospel of Grace, but it was a gospel. reread Genesis 12, 15, 18 and you will see the gospel there was "the nations would be blessed through his seed". but no where is it ever said faith alone in Christ for the forgiveness of sins. there are many gospels (good news) but only one gospel of grace and only found in the new testament.

The unity of both the OT and NT covenant is clearly taught in Scripture…
  • Its promise was the same (Ex 19:4-6 cf 1Pet 2:5,9; Jer 31:33cf 2Cor 6:16)
  • Its condition was the same – faith (Gen 15:6 cf Rom 4:3)
  • The object of this faith was the same – Christ (John 8:56; Acts 2:25-32; Heb 4:2)
This is why Christians are made partakers of the blessing of Abraham (Gal 3:8,9,14)

[/QUOTE]

chette777 07-14-2009 11:04 PM

sounds like covenant theology.

Study more on dispensationalism and search out the three things you mentioned in the forum threads. all have been addressed before.

but I want you to know that 1) we (the body of Christ) have been given no earthly promises, 2) while faith is in all dispensation designs for receiving God's grace, certain works were needed in order to prove their faith was genuine in the OT. and 3) Abraham did not have, nor did any other old testament saint have Jesus as the object of their faith.

Luke 07-15-2009 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryb (Post 23965)
The Gospeel was also preached to Abraham...

Gal 3:8 - And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed

Other things to consider...

Gal 3:17 - And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

1 Pet 3:18-20
For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 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.

Just a question for you.. when was Abraham saved?

Was it Genesis 15, or Genesis 18, or Genesis 22?

Paul says it was Genesis 15 (In Romans 4), and then above, in Galatians 3 he says it is in Genesis 18 when he hears the gospel. James says it was Genesis 22...

What does Abraham hear in Genesis 18? "In thee all nations shall be blessed". That's not the same gospel you and I hear. And if you want to say it is the gospel of God, then how was Abraham saved (imputed righteousness in Genesis 15) before he even heard it (the quote in Galatians is from Genesis 18).

And that's what rightly dividing is all about....

peopleoftheway 07-15-2009 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryb (Post 23961)
Quite a mischaracterization since Covenantal Theology does not promote the practice of animal sacrifice.

One must be careful to read distinctions in the Scripture where they are warranted. There is a difference between the shadows of the OT that pointed to Christ (e.g. animal sacrifices), which were ceremonial laws...and the moral laws as summed up in the 10 commandments, which are still in effect in the new administration of the covenant of grace.

The whole point is that anyone who is trusting in the Blood of Christ rather than bringing an animal sacrifice to cover sin is a dispensationalist. In the same way that anyone who observes the first day of the week rather than the seventh.
Are you saying that ALL of the 10 commandments given to Moses are still in effect?

larryb 07-15-2009 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peopleoftheway (Post 23984)
The whole point is that anyone who is trusting in the Blood of Christ rather than bringing an animal sacrifice to cover sin is a dispensationalist. In the same way that anyone who observes the first day of the week rather than the seventh.
Are you saying that ALL of the 10 commandments given to Moses are still in effect?

Yes, all of the 10 commandments are still in effect. They are a summary of God's everlasting moral law, and have nothing to do with the ceremonial law which was based on the blood of animals as they pointed to Christ. Now that Christ has come there's no more need for the shadows that pointed to Him, but the moral law does not change as it is rooted in the very character of God.

peopleoftheway 07-15-2009 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peopleoftheway (Post 23984)
The whole point is that anyone who is trusting in the Blood of Christ rather than bringing an animal sacrifice to cover sin is a dispensationalist. In the same way that anyone who observes the first day of the week rather than the seventh.
Are you saying that ALL of the 10 commandments given to Moses are still in effect?

Nevermind I re read that you stated moral laws. To be perfectly honest I regret even writing the above reply as I have no intention of discussing Calvin's teaching's.
God never changes, his dealings with men do.

larryb 07-15-2009 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke (Post 23982)
What does Abraham hear in Genesis 18? "In thee all nations shall be blessed". That's not the same gospel you and I hear. And if you want to say it is the gospel of God, then how was Abraham saved (imputed righteousness in Genesis 15) before he even heard it (the quote in Galatians is from Genesis 18).

Part of the Gospel that you and I hear is the blessing of the nations. Prior to Christ Israel was God's instrument of salvation, now it is the world-wide Church...into all nations. Satan has been bound precisely for that reason - that he should not deceive the nations any more...

Rev 20:2-3
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.


It is the blessing of Abraham that comes to the nations/Gentiles...

Gal 3:14 - That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.


God did not give the inheritance to Abraham by the law...

Gal 3:18 - For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.


Abraham did not look for an earthly inheritance ...

Heb 11:9-10
By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

larryb 07-15-2009 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peopleoftheway (Post 23986)
Nevermind I re read that you stated moral laws. To be perfectly honest I regret even writing the above reply as I have no intention of discussing Calvin's teaching's.
God never changes, his dealings with men do.

I'm sure Calvin would be quite beside himself if he knew folks thought that he created the teachings that i have posted here.

peopleoftheway 07-15-2009 06:11 AM

Not that I assume what you are "teaching" IS DIRECTLY from John Calvin, what I am "saying" is that It is clear that you approach the Bible from a reformed perspective, that stems from the teaching of John Calvin, I personally REJECT all 5 points of Calvinism and have no intention of discusing the teaching of it with anyone unless it is in refutation of it. You, by Gods "free will" can choose to believe whatever you wish, that your business and the Lords.

The 4th Commandment was part of the ceremonial law given exclusively to Old testament Israel

Colossians 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.

When Christ died on the cross, the veil of the JEWISH temple was rent in twain, this signified the NEW covenant between God and His people. Ceremonial laws were abolished, they were a reminder of Gods divine truths to Israel.
The "sabbath" is NOT to be observed today, its as simple as ..

Colossians 2:16,17, Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ

Eating swine flesh, circumcision, sabbath, and other jewish ceremonial laws were nailed to my Saviours Cross on Calvarys Hill. Christ FULLFILLED the sabbath and I am "Resting in him"

If the sabbath is to be observed "today" then some Godly brethren here on this forum who "work" on the sabbath, should by all accounts be put to death

Exodus 31:15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."

As far as I am concerned the sabbath is gone, I am not to keep it, it was meant for Israel, Christ fulfilled it for me, he is my "rest"
Gods moral laws are to be kept, but the 1 ceremonial law was nailed to the Lords cross.

larryb 07-15-2009 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peopleoftheway (Post 23990)
Not that I assume what you are "teaching" IS DIRECTLY from John Calvin, what I am "saying" is that It is clear that you approach the Bible from a reformed perspective, that stems from the teaching of John Calvin, I personally REJECT all 5 points of Calvinism and have no intention of discusing the teaching of it with anyone unless it is in refutation of it.

Yes, i am Reformed and not dispensational in my theology.
No, that teaching does not stem from the teachings of John Calvin. It would be more accurate to say that it stems from Augustine, but even more accurate to say that its source is the Scripture itself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peopleoftheway (Post 23990)
The 4th Commandment was part of the ceremonial law given exclusively to Old testament Israel

Strange how 1 out of 10 commandments would be only for Israel and ceremonial in nature.

Consider that the Sabbath rest was given at creation, before the fall, and not just to Israel but to all of mankind in Adam. That's why the commandment in Ex 20 starts with "remember"...it is not a command that started with the nation of Israel at Sinai, but rather one that had been in existence from the beginning.

chette777 07-15-2009 07:08 AM

Rev 20:2-3 has not taken place yet. revelation is a book of prophecy John wrote in 90AD concerning the Lords Day which is his great day of wrath.

for Israel never had a division between ceremonial Civil and moral laws and commandments they ALL went together. anyone who taught otherwise is not being true to God Word and would be considered a heretic by Israel for doing so.

LarryB's posts are SDA teaching. We don't put our trust in Augustine or any other Alexandrian cultist. or any man for that matter. We put our trust in teh Pure unadulterated King James Bible.

I am not a religious person. I am a spiritual person who understands the spiritual things of God.

larryb 07-15-2009 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23994)
Rev 20:2-3 has not taken place yet. revelation is a book of prophecy John wrote in 90AD concerning the Lords Day which is his great day of wrath.

Interesting how you look upon your statement as being fact though the Scripture does not claim it as fact.

Rev 1:1 - The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John


Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23994)
for Israel never had a division between ceremonial Civil and moral laws and commandments they ALL went together. anyone who taught otherwise is not being true to God Word and would be considered a heretic by Israel for doing so.

Israel did have a division. The King was permitted to execute justice based on the moral law, but was not permitted to execute the ceremonial law...that was the priests job. So there certainly was a division.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23994)
LarryB's posts are SDA teaching. We don't put our trust in Augustine or any other Alexandrian cultist. or any man for that matter. We put our trust in teh Pure unadulterated King James Bible.

That's simply not true. SDA came long after the teaching that i adhere to - the teaching of Scripture. You must be either unaware of SDA teachings or unaware of my understanding of Scripture teaching.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23994)
I am not a religious person. I am a spiritual person who understands the spiritual things of God.

That's a shame that you're not religious...i guess that means you don't have to adhere to...

James 1:26-27
If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Cloudwalker 07-15-2009 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryb (Post 23961)
Quite a mischaracterization since Covenantal Theology does not promote the practice of animal sacrifice.

Covenant Theology is absolute garbage and heresay...the church never replaced Israel and God is NOT finished with the Jews...I believe Romans 9,10,11 are clear and countless other Bible prophecies that reformers seem to have swept under the rug. Calvinism is just one big mess...bottom line. :eek:

I'm sorry but this is one of the reasons why I absolutely reject and detest Calvinism...They hold the writings of the reformers as inspired and infallible and also...they exalt these men to the point of worship...Augustine, John Calvin, Martin Luther, Charles Spurgeon, RC Sproul, James White and on and on it goes.

No offense Larry but you obviously have an agenda here and that's to spread your reformed theology...but I call it a doctrine of devils, I'm not buying what you're selling, thanks anyways, I'll stick with the word of God and not man's opinion and interpretation.

It's quite scary.

pbiwolski 07-15-2009 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larryb (Post 23961)
One must be careful to read distinctions in the Scripture where they are warranted. There is a difference between the shadows of the OT that pointed to Christ (e.g. animal sacrifices), which were ceremonial laws...and the moral laws as summed up in the 10 commandments, which are still in effect in the new administration of the covenant of grace.

Allow me to quote James Knox in his new book The Law and Rightly Dividing The Word Reconsidered (pages 61-62),

"In a desperate attempt to cling to the law, many ministers and some denominations have tried to divide the law into sections or divisions. While we cannot list all the many ways their arguments are phrased, one example will suffice.

"We are told that the law of the Lord is the ten commandments and that the law of Moses includes the ordinances, offerings, feast days, and the dietary laws, etc. They say that Jesus' finished work did not include the ten commandments but that only the law of Moses was fulfilled at the cross.

The easiest way to put this error to bed is to show that the terms are used interchangeably by the Holy Spirit. Luke 2:22-24 says, And when the days of her purification according to the LAW OF MOSES were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; (As it is written in the LAW OF THE LORD, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;) And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the LAW OF THE LORD...

"Notice in the passage that Mary is said to have taken the baby Jesus to the temple to present Him to the Lord, in obedience to the LAW OF THE LORD and to offer a sacrifice according to the LAW OF THE LORD. Such a requirement is not found in the ten commandments but in the (so called) law of Moses. Again we read: And when they had performed all things according to the LAW OF THE LORD, they returned into Galilee... (Luke 2:39).

"One may find this same argument stated as, 'Jesus died to save us from the ceremonial law but we are still under the moral law.' The scriptures studed in this section show that such a position cannot be supported by the word of God.

"The believer is not under the law but under grace (Romans 6:14). We are delivered from the law (Romans 7:6), free from the law (Romans 8:2), and dead to the law (Galatians 2:19). Praise the Lord!"

JOHN G 07-15-2009 08:54 AM

Consider..
 
This has been a dispute from the beginning between believers.

Act 15:5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
Act 15:6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing,

No one has ever kept the Law of Moses except our King Jesus!

Act 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

Here is the four commandments for the Gentiles.

Act 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

It is good news to be saved by grace and not by works of the law!

Act 15:31 Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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