Why do Dispensationalists teach Separation Theology?

[UnitedWithChrist]

 

[Kolistus]

Actually dispensationalists would believe that too.

Covenant theology teaches that the organizing principle of God's work with man centers around covenants, and dispensationalism teaches that the organizing principle of God's work with man centers around dispensations. Classic dispensationalism teaches that there are seven dispensations, all of which ultimately fail and result in punishment.

Many dispensationalists deny that the Church is under the New Covenant, as they believe this new covenant is only made with Israel, and not the Church.

My strong conviction is that they are very ignorant about union with Christ and other conflicting teachings that reduce dispensationalism to nonsense. The ordinary dispensationalist doesn't know the underlying presuppositions of their view, though. They have simply been taught dispensationalism by their pastors or others, and accept it without understanding its' repercussions.

None of the dispensationalists I know would say we arent in the new covenant. They say its fully realized in the millennium

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

None of the dispensationalists I know would say we arent in the new covenant. They say its fully realized in the millennium

Maybe all the ones you know are "progressive dispensationalists". They are all the ones who know that their system has obvious errors, and have patched it a bit so they are less obvious.

 

[Kolistus]

Maybe all the ones you know are "progressive dispensationalists". They are all the ones who know that their system has obvious errors, and have patched it a bit so they are less obvious.

Where do I fit in?

I believe that God has made different covenants with different people(s) in different times, each covenant being either two sided or one sided. The one sided covenants are guaranteed to work, the two sided ones not so much because they depend on man doing something to receive the blessing and if they dont, its not gonna succeed.

I believe there is only one people of God in Christ Jesus from both Jews and Gentiles but that the two groups still retain their identity, just like males and females retain there identity even if they are one in Christ.

I believe we are in the new covenant right now and all are saved by the same Gospel today and tomorrow

Which one am I? Doesnt fit either

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Where do I fit in?

I believe that God has made different covenants with different people(s) in different times, each covenant being either two sided or one sided. The one sided covenants are guaranteed to work, the two sided ones not so much because they depend on man doing something to receive the blessing and if they dont, its not gonna succeed.

I believe there is only one people of God in Christ Jesus from both Jews and Gentiles but that the two groups still retain their identity, just like males and females retain there identity even if they are one in Christ.

I believe we are in the new covenant right now and all are saved by the same Gospel today and tomorrow

Which one am I? Doesnt fit either

You aren't too far off from me, although it sounds like you believe in full preterism which I would not. But, I am basing this on a few scraps of information.

A primary difference would be that covenant theology is more organic in nature, whereas dispensationalism doesn't seem to be. Human history is shaped by a sovereign LORD who knows what he is doing, and works with man accordingly. Reformed theology is also more Christ-centered rather than Israel-centered.

And, I think their hermeneutics are lame because they ignore obvious shadows and types, and accuse others of allegorization and spiritualizing Scripture, even though they apply the same techniques when it suits them and maintains their belief system.

 

[Reba1]

Dispensationalist have more camps then the boy scouts

 

[Kolistus]

You aren't too far off from me, although it sounds like you believe in full preterism which I would not. But, I am basing this on a few scraps of information.

A primary difference would be that covenant theology is more organic in nature, whereas dispensationalism doesn't seem to be. Human history is shaped by a sovereign LORD who knows what he is doing, and works with man accordingly. Reformed theology is also more Christ-centered rather than Israel-centered.

And, I think their hermeneutics are lame because they ignore obvious shadows and types, and accuse others of allegorization and spiritualizing Scripture, even though they apply the same techniques when it suits them and maintains their belief system.

I dont believe in full preterism I believe Jesus will return literally in the future.

I consider the state of Israel a miracle but I would never support any of their plans to build a third temple. In the local Christian TV here there was a man encouraging Christians to support that project. Its a wicked project and that temple will be an abomination because it will be a temple where they will accept ALL religions, atleast all Abrahamic ones.

Im caught in a bad spot because I do keep up with current day events and I see the world is going crazy in so many ways, but I want to not be a sensationalist like the media and many Christian YouTube channels are. They are hyping things up to create interest in their material, its a good thing to let people know whats going on in the world and how it relates to Bible prophecy, its a bad thing to make false claims that when proven false will drag Christianity's credibility down. Secular people arent wise enough to notice who is who nor do they have any discernment in spiritual matters so all they see is a Christian said and did THIS.

By Reformed you would mean Calvinist? Im not one but I wouldnt mind witnessing with one or even being in a Calvinist church if there was one near to me. I leave the predestination business to the "none of my business" category.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

My strong conviction is that they are very ignorant about union with Christ and other conflicting teachings that reduce dispensationalism to nonsense.

Not true.

 

[Reba1]

So much of Dispensationalism based of Darby and Scofield . Scofield absolutely re-wrote scripture to fit the Zionist of the day.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Acts 3:19-21 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, 21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago.

I'm about to cause the premillennarians' heads to spin. They will run to their dens, grab their calculators, charts and graphs and diligently persevere until they form their rescue device to save their precious theology

This verse proves Peter was not a premillennial guy. He says that Jesus stays in heaven until the "restoration of all things".

It appears you've not seen my post on Acts 3... I'll place it here:

[quoting]

Acts 3:21 [speaking to "ye men of Israel," v.12 (unsaved persons as noted in v.13-15,17,19)] then states: "whom indeed it behooves heaven to receive until the times of restoration of all things of which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from the age."

[i.e. the OT prophecies... in contrast to that which He had theretofore kept "hidden in God"/was as yet undisclosed]


In vv.13 and 26 the phrase "His Servant Jesus" (they had not been expecting the "suffering servant" aspects of His Person, only the "reigning-in-power King" aspects, though both aspects had been prophesied in the OT; Chpt 3's point is Peter telling them they'd overlooked the former of these two aspects ['His Suffering Servant'], and thus had a hand [themselves] in fulfilling that very thing, vv.13-15), but this was not saying that "everything" was at this point in time (the time of Acts 3) fully fulfilled; and...

...there are TWO "raise" senses spoken of in Acts 3... v.15 speaking of His being "raised from the dead," but the other being "raised" to a position of prominence BEFORE His death (that is, to the position of 'a Prophet like unto Moses'...'raise up unto you of your brethren like unto me [Moses]; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you' and 'UNTO YOU FIRST God, having raised up [to a position of prominence BEFORE His death] His Servant Jesus, SENT him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities'). The "ALL things which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets" (meaning, OT prophecies) have not yet been fully fulfilled, but remain for a yet-future time

[end quoting]


____________

The "amill-teachings" say that the phrase "spoke of these days" refers to His kingly [Davidic] throne [supposedly] up in heaven NOW, but the phrase refers to the "Suffering Servant" aspect of His ministry, what they'd OVERLOOKED in OT prophecy! (AND they miss the TWO ASPECTS of "raise" in this text!!); and it is VERY FLAWED to stop in the middle of the entire sentence/thought being conveyed (v.21)!! Hello.


And I made a post the other day re: the correlation between Rev19:19,21/16:14-16/20:5 and that of Isaiah 24:21-22[23]' FIRST of TWO "PUNISH" words (the two being separated by a TIME PERIOD, just like we see in Rev20).

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

I'm about to cause the premillennarians' heads to spin.

Oh, your "amill-teachings" ideas make my head spin alright. (far too many corrections need to be covered, LOL)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

[^ to add to my earlier post] The "amill-teachings" have not considered why verse 24 says, "the prophets from Samuel, and those subsequently":

Acts 3:24 -

"And also all the prophets from Samuel, and those subsequently, as many as have spoken, also have proclaimed these days." [His "Suffering Servant" aspect they had OVERLOOKED/BYPASSED in their reading of OT prophecies concerning the Messiah]


1 Samuel 8:7 -

"And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them."


[Jesus had said this in His earthly ministry (in a Lk19 parable)... and this is also what was said regarding Joseph's FIRST dream (correlating with Jesus' FIRST advent); i.e. His "REJECTION" they'd OVERLOOKED, and thus had a hand (themselves) in fulfilling THAT VERY THING]

 

[Reba1]

[^ to add to my earlier post] The "amill-teachings" have not considered why verse 24 says, "the prophets from Samuel, and those subsequently":

Acts 3:24 -

"And also all the prophets from Samuel, and those subsequently, as many as have spoken, also have proclaimed these days." [His "Suffering Servant" aspect they had OVERLOOKED/BYPASSED in their reading of OT prophecies concerning the Messiah]


1 Samuel 8:7 -

"And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them."


[Jesus had said this in His earthly ministry (in a Lk19 parable)... and this is also what was said regarding Joseph's FIRST dream (correlating with Jesus' FIRST advent); i.e. His "REJECTION" they'd OVERLOOKED, and thus had a hand (themselves) in fulfilling THAT VERY THING]

When was Acts 3:24 written?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

When was Acts 3:24 written?

First of all, please take note of what I had written here:

"Acts 3:21 [speaking to "ye men of Israel," v.12 (unsaved persons as noted in v.13-15,17,19)] then states: […]" [that is, Peter... SPEAKING TO...]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

They deny that death and unrighteous people cease to exist at Jesus' return.
This is not what 1 Corinthians 15 teaches.
And, yes, I have seen theDivineWatermark's dispensationalist efforts to squeeze the Millennium into his explanation of 1 Corinthians 15. It reminds me of the efforts that cultists make to defend their doctrines, only usually they are a lot more clearer and have refined their technique more.

Ah yes, you must be referring to my reference to the "THEN" word in 1 Corinthians 15:24 ("THEN the end"--no "cometh" word is in the text, btw).

"G1534 - eita - then"... a DIFFERENT Greek word from some "then" words used in other places...

where THIS "THEN" word ("THEN [G1534] the end") is a SEQUENCE word only, with NO TIME-ELEMENT attached with it.

So the first two items LISTED are some 2000 years apart; the next two items LISTED here have no problem whatsoever being another 1000 years apart. [with the "for He must reign" happening in it! Just like in the Isaiah 24:21-23,23 passage I just pointed out (the TIME PERIOD *between* the TWO "PUNISH" words there)]

[UWC has a problem with it though; in fact, the "amill-teachings" INCORRECTLY say this text means "THEN [IMMEDIATELY] the end" (or the like)... NOT!!]

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

More than that, Revelation is a series of visions with overlapping content, and not one long sequence of events like Dispensationalists teach. If someone reads it, they can see that there is overlapping content as the return of Christ is described in more places than just Rev 19. Dispensationalists have to re-work those sections in order to maintain their belief system.

As far as I know, Dispensationalists don't do as you are describing.

They believe the SEAL, TRUMPETS, VIALS are indeed SEQUENTIAL, and then wherever else provides timing and sequence wording and clues...

but that SOME aspects of the Revelation are indeed "interludes" and so forth...

And the reader may have already taken note of my post showing how I believe Rev19:19,21/16:14-16/20:5 is all speaking of "His Second Coming to the earth" point in time (several other places speaking of this point in time, as well). It seems you are just wanting to put a negative spin on the viewpoint of others, without really understanding it [nor wanting to] (and perhaps only having been exposed to the ones you are labeling "wacky" or some such... I know you've explained how my posts are too confusing to you, I guess I can be lumped in with the "wacky," in your view??)

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

And as a P.S. to my Post #815...

I'm not sure that saying that "THEN G1534" being a SEQUENCE WORD ONLY (with NO time-element attached) is all that "complicated".

It's like, when you tell your kids about the holidays (using this SEQUENCE ONLY word "THEN"), saying,

FIRST there is Valentine's Day,

THEN there is Independence Day,

THEN there is Christmas Day.

You didn't mean for them to think that immediately after the 4th of July (like, on July 5), they could expect "presents and candy canes" (or however you picture celebrations of "Christmas Day" might look).

Not complicated nor confusing.

 

[Reba1]

First of all, please take note of what I had written here:

"Acts 3:21 [speaking to "ye men of Israel," v.12 (unsaved persons as noted in v.13-15,17,19)] then states: […]" [that is, Peter... SPEAKING TO...]

Do you always yell at people who dont understand your meanings?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Do you always yell at people who dont understand your meanings?

My aim in enlarging the text was for your benefit (in case it was not noticed when you read my post), so that we could then have a discussion regarding your inquiry.

My apologies.

I often try to use means of "emphasis" (not intending YELLING).


By the way, Welcome, I see you are a New Member. I hope to see you around the boards.

 

[garee]

Where do I fit in?

I believe that God has made different covenants with different people(s) in different times, each covenant being either two sided or one sided. The one sided covenants are guaranteed to work, the two sided ones not so much because they depend on man doing something to receive the blessing and if they dont, its not gonna succeed.

I believe there is only one people of God in Christ Jesus from both Jews and Gentiles but that the two groups still retain their identity, just like males and females retain there identity even if they are one in Christ.

I believe we are in the new covenant right now and all are saved by the same Gospel today and tomorrow

Which one am I? Doesnt fit either

The "Amil postion" or signified works the best .It is a little difference than the what some call full preterism

There is one covenant not effected by time periods . The covenant of grace .The covenant of faith .

Unseen God working in the hearts of men purifying the hearts of all born again men in every generation as a work of faith. Christ the anointing Spirit of God faith. Again the work of God's faith working in us to both will and do his good pleasure.It as a work of faith is also called His labor of love

Acts 15:8-10 King James Version (KJV) And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 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?