One could, no one except Christ has.
It also proves that one could.
Sealed by the baptism en the Holy Ghost
- Thread starter TomL
- Start date
dwight92070
Active Member
I'm not able to detect whether you're being serious here or sarcastic. I hope you are serious, because Jesus was when He gave us His commandments. However, we must remember that Jesus often used hyperbole, such as "cut off your hand" or "pluck out your eye", if they cause you to sin. You're probably correct, that my analogy of an instruction manual for life was too weak.
dwight92070
Active Member
God's promise of eternal life has always been conditional. There's too many verses that show us that to deny it. If you choose to live in denial of the truth of scripture, you are free to so, but there are consequences.
Johann
Active Member
I very sincere @dwight92070 and my apologies for coming across as being sarcastic, far from it brother.
I'm actually a very austere man, and if I want to be lighthearted-misunderstanding.
We are all in different stages of our sanctification in Christ Jesus, some more mature, some weak, no matter, it's our personal relationship and the indwelling Holy Spirit that's really important, not what we know.
God bless.
Johann.
dwight92070
Active Member
Of course those verses are true, IF WE CONTINUE TO ABIDE IN HIM.
"Take care, BRETHREN, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart in falling away from the living God." Hebrews 3:12
For IF, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, 'A dog returns to its own vomit', and 'A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.' " 2 Peter 2:20-22
dwight92070
Active Member
We need BOTH, and more besides those - 2 Peter 1:5-8
"You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." 2 Peter 3:18
dwight92070
Active Member
If that's true, then everyone under the Law failed. But we have examples of people who DID NOT FAIL under the Law - Zacharias and Elizabeth, the parents of John the Baptist:
"They were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord." Luke 1:6
Philippians 3:6 " ... as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless."
These verses inform us that there were very likely multitudes of persons under the Law who were blameless and righteous in God's eyes.
Possibly Joseph and Mary, Simeon and Anna. Remember God told Elijah that there were 7,000 who had not bowed the knee to Baal - not to mention Elijah himself. Also, look at all the other prophets and the people who obeyed them and some of the Kings of Judah, who were righteous in God's eyes.
God did not give the Law to the Jews, so that they would fail. He expected them to obey it, and multiplied thousands did. However, Hebrews tells us that the New Covenant IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE OLD. So if God expected the Jews to obey the Law, how much more does He expect us (Gentile and Jew), now under the New Covenant, to obey Jesus?
Last edited:
Complete
Active Member
dwight92070
Active Member
Paul tells us that the Law was a GOOD thing, leading the Jews TO CHRIST.
Here we see the pernicious doctrine of dispensationalism.
Jesus told some scribes and Pharisees that they invalidated the word of God for the sake of their traditions. Mark 7:13
Dispensationalists invalidate the word of God for the sake of their man-made false doctrine.
Chris tells us that "forgiveness was conditional in that dispensation" but implies that it is no longer conditional under this current "dispensation of the grace of God." Therefore, by his reasoning, we don't currently have to obey Jesus' words in Matthew 6:14-15, to be forgiven ourselves.
This is A LIE. Jesus Himself warned us that if we don't DO what He commands us in the Sermon on the Mount, that we will be like a foolish man building our house on the sand, and it is inevitable that we will fall.
Besides that error, it is also false to assume that the time of the gospels, which was all of Jesus' life on earth, was still under the Law - thus invalidating ALL of Jesus' words, consigning them to the Old Covenant - therefore, they say, we don't have to obey His words today! This is blasphemous!
"The Law and the Prophets were until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God is preached, ..." Luke 16:16
"For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John. Matthew 11:13
The requirements of the Law ended just before John the Baptist came on the scene. He and Jesus both proclaimed a New Covenant, which was the gospel of Jesus, also called the kingdom of God.
Today, we ARE TO OBEY JESUS' WORDS -ALL OF THEM.
Johann
Active Member
@dwight92070
This was totally uncalled for to @Complete brother, not Christlike, and even me are learning a lot from the Berean Bible Society--I think you need to apologize as dispentationalism is NOT pernicious-look at the Forum and see for yourself, it is welcomed here.
We are all students of God's word and not Rabbi's sitting in the seat of Moses as the sole source of authority on the Scriptures.
Humble yourself and receive correction and brotherly advice.
Johann.
Complete
Active Member
dwight92070
Active Member
There were multiplied thousands of Jews and Gentile proselytes who kept the Law. The Bible names many of them, which I have listed in a previous post. Did Moses keep the Law? Did Joshua and Caleb keep the Law? Did Elijah and Elishah keep the Law? What about the 7,000 that God told Elijah had not bowed the knee to Baal? Did all the other prophets keep the Law? Did David keep the Law? Did Joseph and Mary keep the Law? Did Zacharias and Elizabeth, Simeon and Anna, and Paul keep the Law?
YES THEY DID! Keeping the Law did not mean that you never sinned. It meant that when you did sin, that you repented and offered the appropriate sacrifice or restitution - to remain obedient to the Law?
Even today, having eternal life does not mean that we never sin. It means that our past and current sins were forgiven. After that, when we sin, we repent and obey 1 John 1:9, to be given a fresh cleansing.
Eternally-Grateful said: "The first sin you ever committed the law of Moses could only curse you. And every time you broke it. Your curse kept adding"
What a foolish and totally false statement about the Law! The Law gave them instructions as to what they were to do when they sinned. If they obeyed that, God forgave them, looking forward to His Son's sacrifice as being what was required to cleanse them. If they refused to repent of their sin and do what the Law required, and persisted in their rebellion, THEN possibly God might curse them - but God's mercy and patience, even waiting for them to repent, sometimes lasted CENTURIES - as it did for the pagan Canaanites.
The Law was not weak in telling the Jews how to live. David said "the Law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul ... The precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes ... They are more desirable than gold, yes, than much fine gold; Sweeter also than honey and the drippings of the honeycomb. Moreover, by them Your servant is warned; in keeping them there is great reward." Psalm 19
Even Paul said that the Law was good. Yes, the Jews are no longer under the Law, even though the non-Christian Jews oftentimes think they are. In fact, the requirement for the Jews to keep the Law, ever since Jesus came, has been abolished. It is not in effect. We are not under the Law, but we certainly learn much from it. After all, it was God's creation and, as they say, He never creates junk.
dwight92070
Active Member
I'm surprised that you have IMO overreacted here. I have NOT hidden my view of dispensationalism on this forum. I have posted it on several threads for well over a year. I am entitled to my opinion about dispensationalism, just as you are. I believe the same for Jehovah's Witness doctrine, Mormonism, Seventh-Day Adventist, Christian Science, etc. Also, I believe the Baptismal Regeneration doctrine and the anti-Trinity doctrine are also very dangerous as well. As far as I know, people from any of those false doctrines are also welcomed here. I have done a lot of studying of dispensationalism, so my opinion is based on much evidence.
I have NEVER nor will I ever claim to be a Rabbi (which Jesus told us not to do) NOR a teacher sitting in the seat of Moses, NOR the sole source of authority on the Scriptures. I am simply a Christian who continually reads and studies the Bible and many informative Christian books. I am only looking for the truth as I assume you are. John said, "I was very glad to find your children walking in the truth, just as we have received commandment from the Father." 2 John 4
I am sorry if you are offended, but I don't see a need to apologize for having an opinion about a doctrine that I believe has caused much confusion and error in the body of Christ - even to the point of teaching people that we don't have to obey Jesus' teaching in the gospels, because that was under the "dispensation" of the Law. Hogwash!!! Who is it that would attempt to get Christians to ignore Jesus' teaching?? You got it. Satan.
dwight92070
Active Member
Me too. I stand by what I said in #389 and in #393.
Last edited:
Behold
Active Member
You can't be a real student of the bible, unless you understand some simple divisions in the word.
The correct way to understand dispensational teaching is to realize that God never changes, but He does change how He deals with Man.
This is defined by Paul as "Rightly DIVIDING".....as you have to divide the verses, contextually, by "spiritual discernment" to get correct doctrine.
Here are a few "dispensations".
1.) You have an old and new Testament.
2.) You have an old covenant and a new covenant.
3.) You have the garden of Eden, wthere there was no Moses law, and later you have Moses Law.
4.) You have Moses Law that is dealt with per believer born again by the Cross of Christ.
5.) Currently you have the "time of the. Gentiles" and that is not in the OT.........its only in the NT.
6.) And the "Time of the Gentiles" is not God dealing with the JEW......whereas Jesus came for the "house of Israel only"
Up next?
7.) The TRIBULATION.....and that is not "the time of the Gentiles"......its mainly God resuming His dealing with the unsaved JEW.
So, anyone can see that there are a lot of changes in the BIBLE.....where God is doing something and it changes... and that is how to understand..."Rightly dividing" or "dispensations".
Johann
Active Member
dwight92070
Active Member
Right off the bat, we see the divisiveness of dispensationalism.
It began with John Nelson Darby in around 1830 and later was propagated by many, but when C. I. Scofield created his study Bible in 1909, that was probably the most successful scheme to publicize dispensationalism.
So for 1830 years there was no such doctrine, so according to Behold, and I think MOST dispensationalists, any and all Bible scholars during those 1830 years WERE NOT REAL STUDENTS OF THE BIBLE - INCLUDING THE APOSTLES THEMSELVES, unless he believes that the apostles taught the same thing as Darby - clearly not the case.
ONLY THEY, i.e. the Dispensationalists, are real students of the Bible, so ONLY THEY have the truth.
This is a standard earmark of a cult - claiming that they alone have the truth. For them, it is impossible that a non-dispensationalist can have the truth.
Even Darby himself said that his views were the original views that the church early in her history, lost sight of. But now, in the 1830's, Darby was bringing back to the church the truth that had been lost for centuries. Joseph Smith made the same claim, when he started the Mormon church, also around 1830. Darby was in England, Smith in the United States.
The bedrock foundation of the Dallas Theological Seminary, founded in 1924 - was dispensationalism. In fact, for a long period of time, students could not even graduate from there, if they disagreed with dispensationalism. That's called "Indoctrination". So much for Christians having "free will", or even freedom of religion - that was not allowed at DTS, if you wanted to get a degree there. Whether that continues today, I don't know, but I just skimmed their website - and it's obvious that pretty much all of their teaching is still "steeped" in dispensationalism. Here we see the attitude: It's my way, or the highway."
In fact, I've heard of churches who asked their pastor to leave, because he decided that he no longer believes dispensationalism. It's divisive, cult-like, propagating doctrines that have no Biblical basis and intolerant of any who disagree with them
Last edited:
Johann
Active Member
You see this @dwight92070? Berean Bible Society? If you have a problem with dispentationalism please ask @civic to remove this, it's endorsed by this forum and there is nothing you can do about it.
An aside--dispensation is in your bible!
The word "dispensation" in English translations of the Bible typically comes from the Greek word οἰκονομία (oikonomia), which means "stewardship," "administration," or "management." It is derived from the verb οἰκονομέω (oikonomeō), meaning "to manage a household" or "to administer."
Occurrences in the New Testament (KJV):
The term "dispensation" appears 4 times in the King James Version (KJV), and the underlying Greek word in each case is οἰκονομία. Here are the instances:
1 Corinthians 9:17
"...for if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation (οἰκονομία) of the gospel is committed unto me."
Verb Form: οἰκονομεῖν (Present Active Infinitive)
Meaning: Paul refers to his responsibility or stewardship of preaching the gospel.
Ephesians 1:10
"...that in the dispensation (οἰκονομία) of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ..."
Verb Form: οἰκονομῆσαι (Aorist Active Infinitive)
Meaning: Refers to the divine administration or plan to unite all things under Christ.
Ephesians 3:2
"...if ye have heard of the dispensation (οἰκονομία) of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward..."
Verb Form: οἰκονομηθείσης (Aorist Passive Participle)
Meaning: The administration or stewardship of God's grace given to Paul.
Colossians 1:25
"...whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation (οἰκονομία) of God which is given to me for you, to fulfill the word of God..."
Verb Form: οἰκονομήθην (Aorist Passive Indicative)
Meaning: The responsibility or commission given to Paul as a servant of the gospel.
4x in our bibles and can you tell me how many times "mystery" is used in Scripture?
Instead of speaking ill against this, why don't you ask @Grace ambassador to lay out the Scriptures for you, RIGHTLY cutting straight the word of God?
Or go to Got Questions, see what they say--there is NOTHING insipid re dispensaionalism and you haven't even go to Berean Bible Society to see if what you say here is verifiable.
Shalom.
J.
dwight92070
Active Member
Wow, another over-reaction from J. who obviously supports dispensationalism and displays the anger of many caught in false doctrine, when confronted with someone who disagrees with them.
I certainly hit a nerve, didn't I? I don't need a dispensationalist to "lay out the scripture for me", because their views are biased and IMO, unBiblical.
I have enjoyed BAM, and I thought ALL viewpoints were welcome, but J. makes me feel like I'm on the verge of either - a. getting on the bandwagon - i.e. becoming a dispensationalist (which will never happen), or b. getting kicked off of this forum.
That's not my idea of the love of Christ and Christian fellowship. I hope the administrators have more grace than has been displayed here.
Dispensationalism is not in my Bible. You must have a new version that I've never seen before, because I don't see it in any version. In fact, even in the Scofield Study Bible, the only place you'll find dispensationalism is in Scofield's margin notes, because it's not in the KJV Bible text, which he uses.
By the way, even an administrator here (I won't mention who) made the statement that those who believe that baptism is required in order to be saved - have the spirit of anti-Christ. Yet many on this forum believe that. Should that administrator apologize to those who believe that? I don't think so. He's entitled to his opinion, just like I am mine.
Last edited:
civic
Active Member
I’m pre mill, pretrib but I don’t push it on anyone. The thing I’m firm on is His 2nd Coming which is yet to come and to be ready as Jesus and Apostles taught.
