[Brother Tim]

Brandon, I will yield to you on this point. "Obey" is not the clearest word to use. I was attempting to put into my own words the following verse. I should just let the Scriptures speak for themselves.

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.

Yes, the sabbath was part of the covenant with Israel, but the principle predates Israel. I still do believe that God has designed our bodies so that a day of rest is needed each week. [At least I sure need it!] It is no accident that we still have a seven-day week today. I would quote a verse from Mark (2:27), but based on some folks here, it doesn't apply to me today.

[Brother Tim]

chette777, could you answer my question in #198?

Also, are you saying that the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7) applies only the the "kingdom age"?

[George]

Re: brother Tim's Posts #200 & 206 (Chit Chat - Dr. Ruckman - underlines by George)

George, I'm sorry, but I can't chop the Scripture into as many tiny pieces as you may. "Rightly dividing" says more than just "dividing", it also must be "right". I don't have a problem with the OT/NT split. God made that pretty clear. I just haven't bought into splitting the NT into all the parts that some believe. Just so you can think me to be really wacky, I'm not pre-trib either. I don't know that there is a label for me prophecy-wise.

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Jerry, I guess we need a new printing of the KJB with the parts that count for us marked differently. ( I'm soo confoosed! ) I am reminded of a statement I heard Bill O'Reilly once say. It went something like this. The Old Testament is just allegory; the parts of the New Testament where Jesus is speaking is the only factual truth, the other parts are just the commentary by men.
For me, I'll start at Genesis and read through to the Revelation, I'll believe every word, and accept that every word is there for me to know, every truth is there for me to understand, and that every teaching is there for me to obey.

Aloha brother Tim,

Let me be real clear from the outset - the purpose of this post is NOT to "make" you believe, or follow what I believe. Neither is it meant to demean you in any way. If you will - this is meant to either "persuade" you or, at the least, inform you as to where I am coming from.

I also heard Bill O'Reilly say pretty much the same thing - more than once. And in regards to your position on pre-trib etc., I am not critical of those who do not share my personal convictions on these matters since it's foretelling the future, but I do hope that you are pre-Millennial. However, your comment about needing a new King James Bible "with the parts that count for us marked differently" is a "cheap shot" for those of us who believe in "rightly dividing the word of truth" - which God (through Paul) has instructed (commanded) us to do [2Timothy 2:15].

It seems that Christians have at least as many ways to read & study the Bible as there are Sects & Denominations. That is why it is so important for those of us who sincerely want to know the "Truth" of God (from "the scripture of truth" - Daniel 10:21) to study the Bible according to God's dictates and not according to our own personal preferences.

There are only three (3) verses in the entire Bible with the word "study" in them and there is only one verse [2Timothy 2:15] that actually tells us how. As you probably know this verse is changed in such a way as to remove all reference to "study" in almost all the other bibles - "interesting" isn't it?. [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.]

My question for you is simple: Why would you, or anyone else, question or "poke fun" at the "method" of Bible study that God requires (not recommends), simply because you have chosen not to use it? God never told us to "Harmonize" the Holy Scriptures - He instructed (commands) us to "rightly divide the word of truth".

The interesting thing is that practically everyone "divides" the word of truth (even a Catholic like Bill O'Reilly!), but are they dividing it correctly? - that's the question. Please notice - God did not say: "rightly dividing the Old & New Testaments"; neither did He say: "rightly dividing the Books of the Bible"; and He didn't say: "rightly dividing the verses" either. He said "rightly dividing the word of God".

And so how do we go about "rightly dividing the word of God"? - I'm glad you asked!

Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Isaiah 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

There it is: The above verses in Isaiah tell us HOW to "rightly divide" - NOT by the Old or New Testaments; NOT by the Books of the Bible; and NOT by verses alone; we are to "rightly divide the word of truth"; and you will notice that God has set the whole thing up so that if a person is "inclined" (heart motive), they will fall backward; be broken; and be snared if they don't do it right! Remember: Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

This reveals the main "problem" with almost all of the so-called "Christian" or "Bible" schools, colleges, and seminaries. The word of God is aimed at the "heart" - while the curriculum and course of study in those schools is aimed at the "mind". David did NOT say: "Thy word have I hid in mine mind that I might not sin against thee"! He said "Thy word have I hid in mine heart that I might not sin against thee".

Bible or "Christian" Schools, colleges, and seminaries can teach "knowledge" and some "discernment", but they can't teach "understanding" or "wisdom" that's the Holy Spirit's job, and He can only do it when we study the Holy Scriptures (on our own), without much "outside influence".

I am against Hyper or Ultra-Dispensationalism (E. W. Bullinger or Cornelius Stam) where the Bible is "chopped up into little pieces". All of the Hyper-Dispensationalist's that I have met emphasized The "intellect" and had very little concern about matters of the heart. God is not "impressed" with our "intellect" or our "education".

Lastly, there have been some hyper-Calvinist who have come on this Forum, who have insisted that if we (Christians) are not Calvinists then we must be Armenians! Most of us on this Forum reject that analysis, and refuse to be labeled either or. The same holds true about Hyper-Dispensationalism - I refuse to be "labeled" or put into the same category as Stam or Bullinger. They were a whole lot smarter than me and better educated, but on the other hand their brand of Dispensationalism is divisive; uncharitable; and destructive; and I disavow any connection to them just because I divide the word of truth and believe in the Dispensations of God.

If this hasn't clarified my position I have much more that I could say on this subject, but this post, as with most of my posts is already too long.

[pbiwolski]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Could you further describe the difference between applying something doctrinally and applying something spiritually? Examples if possible.

Sorry I am so far behind, I'll try to be brief.

Matt. 25:14-30, here the Lord tells of a man that gave talents to his servants then left town. He returned and demanded an account of their doings. You know the passage, so the last servant, the unprofitable servant, was cast into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Now to apply this doctrinally to the church, you would be teaching a works-based salvation. The "wicked and slothful servant" was a servant of his Lord just as the other two faithful ones, yet he was cast into hell because he didn't "live" it.

Most fundamentalists that can't "rightly divide" try to say he wasn't saved in the first place (won't work, vs. 14 says he was "his own servant") or that the result really isn't hell, but rather just a "spiritual form of punishment." That won't work either, Mt. 8:12 shows this is as literal as it gets.

So then, the story starts by the phrase For the kingdom of heaven is as... And that's it, the story is about the Second Coming of Christ (not the Rapture) and His reckoning (vs19) with the Jews (not the Judgment Seat of Christ). Following this reckoning with Israel first, He judges all nations (see the rest of the chapter).

Now once the doctrine is established, you many gain spiritual application from the passage. You can see that God does give us "talents" and desires us to used them for Him, etc. You can see that God is a Judge and fully intends on judging, but do not put yourself (church-age saint) into the story for the outcome for that one servant contradicts Paul's writing to the church.

[pbiwolski]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

It appears to me that the answer to the question is "yes". The two "kingdoms" are the same.

George, I assume that you are going to thoroughly reply. I hope you do, for I'm certain that it would clear up the issue for some others as well.

[George]

Originally Posted by pbiwolski

George, I assume that you are going to thoroughly reply. I hope you do, for I'm certain that it would clear up the issue for some others as well.

There are many cases or situations like the one you have mentioned where if you don't "rightly divide" you'll end up "changing" or "twisting" the scriptures to make them fit your "theological viewpoint".

God is a Person and heaven is a place - God and heaven are definetely NOT the same - then how can the two kingdoms be the same?

I know that rightly dividing is hard work, but we are told to do it.

[Brother Tim]

George, first I intended no "cheap shot" with my comments about a marked Bible. It was intended to draw attention to the extent to which this "dividing" can be carried by someone who is extreme with their dispensational views.

I have a different understanding of the phrase "rightly dividing" than you do. I do not see the word "dividing" to mean "separating". Instead, I interpret it to mean "breaking into parts for clearer understanding". I view the phrase as describing the work required to understand to deeper meanings behind each passage of Scripture. In other words, taking small bites and carefully digesting them through Biblical meditation (Psalm 1) and prayer. This definition does not go against the Isaiah 28 verses that you used. I am not attempting to harmonize, if by that you mean blending all parts into one message.

[Brother Tim]

George, there is no question that God as a person and heaven as a place are different words. That does not mean that the place (or condition) called "Kingdom of Heaven" is different from "Kingdom of God". The key word is "Kingdom". The prepositional phrases "of God" and "of Heaven" set up a relation. "Of God" tells Whose kingdom it is, and "of Heaven" tells the location or condition. IMPORTANT DISTINCTION: The location is where God chooses to establish it, not necessarily what is commonly called "heaven" today.

George, I showed some parallel passages for comparison. It is clearly evident that Jesus is not speaking of two different "kingdoms" with nearly identical wording, and spoken at the same point in time.

[George]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

George, first I intended no "cheap shot" with my comments about a marked Bible. It was intended to draw attention to the extent to which this "dividing" can be carried by someone who is extreme with their dispensational views.

I have a different understanding of the phrase "rightly dividing" than you do. I do not see the word "dividing" to mean "separating". Instead, I interpret it to mean "breaking into parts for clearer understanding". I view the phrase as describing the work required to understand to deeper meanings behind each passage of Scripture. In other words, taking small bites and carefully digesting them through Biblical meditation (Psalm 1) and prayer. This definition does not go against the Isaiah 28 verses that you used. I am not attempting to harmonize, if by that you mean blending all parts into one message.

I did mean exactly that, since that is what happens quite often.

Please re-check my post #203 (same subject), I asked a couple of questions and then I side-tracked you with a second post (#205) which only diluted my first - Bad move on my part.

Here is one of the questions again:

How do you deal with these verses?

Revelation 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Who does the above verse apply to?
Who are they that do His commandments?
Do Christians need the tree of life, when we have drunk from the water of life? When we already possess eternal life"?

1 John 2:25 And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.
1 John 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
1 John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

If we already have "eternal life", then who needs to eat of the tree of life?

[Brother Tim]

George, I've got to take a break for a bit, but I do have an initial response to one of your questions.

You asked twice:
Do Christians need the tree of life
and
then who needs to eat of the tree of life?

But before that you quoted Revelation 22:14.

Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Do you see a difference in the verse and your question?
This is where my understanding of "rightly dividing" kicks in. The verse says that these have a right to the tree of life, not that they need it. You are reading into the verse something that is not there.