Why do Dispensationalists teach Separation Theology?

[Absolutely]

Genesis is the name given to the first book of Moses when the Septuagint was interpreted because it tells the "toledoth" https://biblehub.com/hebrew/8435.htm of the heaven and earth and Adam, Noah, Abraham ect.

The concept of the seven days,generations is in many Jewish teachings. Jubilees is 120 sets of 50 so 120x50=6000. The Jews say it's the year 5759 because their counting off six one thousand year days. Adam was told the earth would bring forth thorns and thistles and he would work by the sweat of his brow. Six days thou shalt labor and on the seventh rest,,,,1(work),2(work),3(work)4(work),5(work),6000(work),,,7'th(Millennial rest and no work).

It's somthing that has been believed and taught from the beginning and in our modern days some are figuring out bits and pieces of it and calling it Dispensationism. That's why their list is similar to the list I gave.

That is why i posted Mat 1 . To show God sees his purposes in brackets of time and genealogies.

 

[Guojing]

could this be an example of dispensationalism:

matthew 25:31-46 teaches salvation by works. as does that one place where they ask Jesus what good thing must i DO and Jesus says keeps commandments because He hasnt died yet.
st.paul teaches salvation by grace through faith eph 2:8-9 2 timothy 1:9.

The gospel of kingdom was based on faith and works. Not only you need to believe in Jesus, you also need to do the works required. But that was only for the Jews.

Now, we are in the grace dispensation, where faith in Jesus death burial and Resurrection is sufficient for salvation.

After the rapture, the grace dispensation would have ended. During the Tribulation, it will once again be the gospel of the kingdom where faith and works come to play again. (Rev 14-:12).

Jesus was talking about that tribulation period.

 

[RickStudies]

Actually the fulness of the Gentiles means that the full complement of Gentiles to enter into the Church has been brought in by God's grace. There will be no more Gentiles added to the Church (a distinct entity) after that. Which also means that it will coincide with the Resurrection/Rapture.

I`d be inclined to agree with that, but not much point in saying you have God`s favor unless you get saved. You put it a lot better then I did tho.

 

[RickStudies]

The gospel of kingdom was based on faith and works. Not only you need to believe in Jesus, you also need to do the works required. But that was only for the Jews.

Now, we are in the grace dispensation, where faith in Jesus death burial and Resurrection is sufficient for salvation.

After the rapture, the grace dispensation would have ended. During the Tribulation, it will once again be the gospel of the kingdom where faith and works come to play again. (Rev 14-:12).

Jesus was talking about that tribulation period.

This is where I start having some issue with dispensationalist opinion. I think grace has always been, always will be the salvation. I believe we have it easy in a sense but Grace always in my view. I`m also pre wrath in my view of the first resurrection.

 

[iamsoandso]

That is why i posted Mat 1 . To show God sees his purposes in brackets of time and genealogies.

Have you ever read any of the early Church letters(Justin Martyr,epistle of Barnabas,Against Heresies ect ? Why I ask is they spoke of the seven Millennial days(some more in depth than others). This is why I say it is similar to the dispensational approach of the modern day but also a little different. Look at AH book 5,chapter 28 and 29(is speaking of the six millennials and the seventh) from an ad170 point of view. John the Apostle set Polycarp over Smyrna(from Revelation) and Irenaeus grew up listening to Polycarp saying what he heard from John, http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book5.html

 

[Guojing]

This is where I start having some issue with dispensationalist opinion. I think grace has always been, always will be the salvation. I believe we have it easy in a sense but Grace always in my view. I`m also pre wrath in my view of the first resurrection.

It is always by God's grace for ALL dispensations, don't get me wrong.

Our response to that grace, is by faith. And how we respond by faith differs depending on which dispensation we are in.

During the dispensation of the law, you exhibit faith by "obeying the law", all the Jews have to obey the law. It is true that all the saints of past ages were saved through the merits of Christ's shed blood, but not through their faith in that shed blood.

Those of past ages were expected to believe only what God had thus far revealed, or what He had revealed to them. In other words, they were saved simply because they trusted God and believed what He said. The full plan of salvation has since been unfolded, but the Scriptures make it crystal clear that these believers were saved without even understanding that Christ would die for them.

When God says, "Repent and be baptized for the remission. of sins," what will faith do? Just one thing: repent and be baptized. We know that oceans of water cannot wash away one sin, yet when John the Baptist and Peter preached repentance and baptism for remission not one of their hearers would have interpreted their words to mean: "Trust in the death of Christ for salvation."

Indeed, when God required water baptism for salvation the only way to manifest faith was to be baptized, and those who refused to do so were condemned for their unbelief:

"But the Pharisees and lawyers REJECTED THE COUNSEL OF GOD
AGAINST THEMSELVES, BEING NOT BAPTIZIED OF HIM" (Luke 7:30).

But when God says, "BUT NOW the righteousness of God without the law is manifested" (Rom. 3:21); "To him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5); "Being Justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 3:24); "In whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins according to the riches of His grace" (Eph. 1:7); "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us" (Tit. 3:5); "Not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:8,9) -

When God now says this, what will faith do? Faith will say, "This is the most wonderful offer ever made by God to man. I cannot refuse it. I will trust Christ as my Savior and accept salvation as the free gift of God's grace."

 

[inukubo]

The Church is fulfilling this prophecy now.

This is related to the post I made on another thread:

Since you bring this up, it is a good time to show how dispensationalists fall off the wagon when it comes to quotes from the OT about ancient Israel.

Here's the verse:

Acts 13:47 47 For so the Lord has commanded us, saying,
“‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’”
(ESV Strong's)

Paul says that AT THAT TIME, Jesus commanded them, saying that they (Paul and his friends) were a fulfillment of this verse.

Here's how DA Carson (a historical premillennialist) views the verse:


Acts 13:47 13:47 light for the Gentiles. Paul applies Isaiah’s Messianic prophecy concerning the servant of the Lord (Isa 49:6; cf. Isa 42:6) to himself and the other missionaries since the church carries out the Messiah’s mission to the world.
(NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible)

Here's how Wayne Grudem (another historical premillennialist) views the verse:

Acts 13:46 13:46–47 Citing Isa. 49:6, Paul stated he was now turning to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas can be seen as doing the work of the Servant because of their connection to Jesus. It was necessary to begin with the Jews since they were God's chosen people and had priority in salvation history (see note on Rom. 1:16). unworthy. Their stubborn resistance showed Paul that it would not be worthwhile for him to spend any more time trying to reason with them.
(ESV SB Notes)

Here's how John MacArthur (a premillennial dispensationalist) views the verse:

Acts 13:46-47 Acts 13:46 first to you. God offered the plan of salvation to the Jews first (Matt. 10:5–6 15:24; Luke 24:47; Rom. 1:16). Although the thrust of Paul’s ministry was to Gentiles, he had a desire to see Jews saved (Rom. 9:1–5 10:1), preaching to them first in many cities (see note on Acts 13:5). we are turning to the Gentiles. Because the Jews rejected the gospel. But God never planned salvation as an exclusive possession of the Jews (Isa. 42:1 6 49:6).
Acts 13:47 Quoted from Isa. 49:6.
(MacArthur Study Notes (ESV))

Notice how unclear MacArthur is, that these verses are being fulfilled in the apostles AT THAT TIME. Why? I think that he is wary of stepping on dispensationalist toes, who think that this prophecy will be fulfilled by Israel in the Millennium, and are not being fulfilled today by the Church.

They get a rash when verses about Israel are applied to the Church, because they believe in Separation Theology.

Actually, most Dispensationalists believe the Servant Songs of Isaiah are only fulfilled by Christ as the perfect servant where Israel failed, so these passages have already been fulfilled and in this Dispensation are currently being fulfilled through the Church as the Body of Christ on earth and united people of God, so we're not "falling off the wagon" on this one.

However, we do "get a rash" when verses which are clearly promises for Israel as a geo-political entity are twisted and shoehorned to somehow apply to the Church, when Christ clearly said His Kingdom is not of this world. So there is clearly a difference (or, shall we say, "separation?") between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Israel, although they will overlap during the Millennium.

 

[iamsoandso]

And there is also an kingdom that will rise prior to the one coming down from heaven where the MoS will rise. It was in the pit in Rev.17:8 and had received a deadly wound. It will ascend prior to the New Jerusalem and it will have an temple that the MoS will sit in. It will seem to be the kingdom and have the correct name. Many will think it is and follow after it with their support and military forces but will be destroyed at the bightness of the Lords coming. Let us make an image of the beast that was and was not yet is is what they say.

 

[KJV1611]

And there is also an kingdom that will rise prior to the one coming down from heaven where the MoS will rise. It was in the pit in Rev.17:8 and had received a deadly wound. It will ascend prior to the New Jerusalem and it will have an temple that the MoS will sit in. It will seem to be the kingdom and have the correct name. Many will think it is and follow after it with their support and military forces but will be destroyed at the bightness of the Lords coming. Let us make an image of the beast that was and was not yet is is what they say.

The more I read the bible the more I think it all happened when Christ came the first time. I think the Old Testament points toward Christ and the cross, the 4 gospels, and from the gospels forward points back to Christ and the cross.

I'm not saying that I know this for sure but like I said, the more I study the more I see it that way.

 

[iamsoandso]

The more I read the bible the more I think it all happened when Christ came the first time. I think the Old Testament points toward Christ and the cross, the 4 gospels, and from the gospels forward points back to Christ and the cross.

I'm not saying that I know this for sure but like I said, the more I study the more I see it that way.

You say all but all of which sets of prophecies Moses,the prophets up to JTB and psalms or the ones the sons and daughters prophecy in the NC(remember?) ?

 

[iamsoandso]

The things in the Law of Moses,the Prophets and Psalms of Jesus? And the prophecies of the sons and daughters are ongoing?

 

[KJV1611]

You say all but all of which sets of prophecies Moses,the prophets up to JTB and psalms or the ones the sons and daughters prophecy in the NC(remember?) ?

I used to be a dispensationalist so I have a lot ideas in my mind that come from that. So I'm slowly unlearning that and trying to let the bible teach me the truth.

I don't know how all of this ends. I do still believe that Jesus will return but I'm not sure about the millennium, I don't know if that is really 1000 years or whether it represents something else.

I see most of Revelation fulfilled, maybe all of it.... just not sure.

 

[iamsoandso]

I used to be a dispensationalist so I have a lot ideas in my mind that come from that. So I'm slowly unlearning that and trying to let the bible teach me the truth.

I don't know how all of this ends. I do still believe that Jesus will return but I'm not sure about the millennium, I don't know if that is really 1000 years or whether it represents something else.

I see most of Revelation fulfilled, maybe all of it.... just not sure.

That's why I continually press the questions about the mark,beast.deadly wound ect. to the camps who say it's past. The other day we discussed Jesus saying the things written in the Law,the Prophets and Psalms about him would be fulfilled. Then in the NC the sons and daughters prophecy, then the two witnesses also so it's two different set's(Jesus points it out),,,but most mix the two together...

 

[iamsoandso]

It's an conundrum,,,Jesus said "in the Law,the prophets till John(JTB) and Psalms". John the Baptist was conceived and born before Jesus and so from JTB backward is one set, and from Jesus forward is in the other set.

 

[Absolutely]

Have you ever read any of the early Church letters(Justin Martyr,epistle of Barnabas,Against Heresies ect ? Why I ask is they spoke of the seven Millennial days(some more in depth than others). This is why I say it is similar to the dispensational approach of the modern day but also a little different. Look at AH book 5,chapter 28 and 29(is speaking of the six millennials and the seventh) from an ad170 point of view. John the Apostle set Polycarp over Smyrna(from Revelation) and Irenaeus grew up listening to Polycarp saying what he heard from John, http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book5.html

I read some of it. So interesting. They,like us combed over the scriptures.
Deep stuff.
I will continue reading it tomorrow

 

[Absolutely]

It's an conundrum,,,Jesus said "in the Law,the prophets till John(JTB) and Psalms". John the Baptist was conceived and born before Jesus and so from JTB backward is one set, and from Jesus forward is in the other set.

Also 2 different priesthoods.

 

[Absolutely]

Jesus' genealogy, David,Judah,Melchizedek

 

[Hevosmies358]

The gospel of kingdom was based on faith and works. Not only you need to believe in Jesus, you also need to do the works required. But that was only for the Jews.

Now, we are in the grace dispensation, where faith in Jesus death burial and Resurrection is sufficient for salvation.

After the rapture, the grace dispensation would have ended. During the Tribulation, it will once again be the gospel of the kingdom where faith and works come to play again. (Rev 14-:12).

Jesus was talking about that tribulation period.

I dont know about that bro. Sounds like we get a free ride when all the others was out for the count before hearing the second bell.

Man. Am I just a FREAK or why dont I fit in with any of these systematic theologies like dispensationalism or covenant theology? I like certain things from both, but would I rep either one as my own? Cant say I agree 100%!

 

[Hevosmies358]

..

The real question is: Is that your dog in the avatar? Adorable! I like the hat. What breed is it?

 

[iamsoandso]

I read some of it. So interesting. They,like us combed over the scriptures.
Deep stuff.
I will continue reading it tomorrow

Bare in mind that Irenaeus in Against Heresies is describing different groups considered heretics. So it's best to begin at the beginning and keep in mind that he writes for a chapter or so stating what different groups of heretic's taught(incorrectly understood) and then he writes for a chapter or so explaining what was correct as John taught Polycarp and then Irenaeus learned from Polycarp.

In short if you begin reading in a chapter where he is describing the teachings of those heretics it would be easy to think the Church believed something by mistake when he is explaining the heretics view(look at who he is talking about,lol). I have spoken with some who read bits and pieces of AH and said they believed blah,blah in the early Church and had to show them they were confusing who was being spoken of in the context.