In reply to:Hmmm, Vern Poythress was my advanced Greek professor when I was at WTS and I can tell you with confidence that Dr. Poythress is thoroughly Amil.
<
thanks for the correction. I thought He was from skimming His commentary on revelation(The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation) a while back. I thought I remembered his comments on rev 20 being pre-mil. Maybe I had confused him with someone else. Maybe my trusted memory is becomign like that of
"Let all that mind...the peace and comfort of their own souls, wholly apply themselves to the study of Jesus Christ, and him crucified"(Flavel)
Joe, <br><br>Knowing the value of those commentaries, I had been saving up gift certificates for Baker Book House from Christmas and my recent birthday. Of course I had previously hinted that I would like the certifs for Baker. My oldest son took my gift certificates without me knowing and with enough cash from my kids and wife bought them and presented them to me this past Saturday.<br><br>Now....to do some serious reading.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]I really do hope and pray that you will give thought and consideration to what we are saying and re-examine the secret-pretrib Rapture (and dispy) against the word of God.
Yes, I know you do. You believe covenant theology is Biblical and you want all Christians to be biblical. So do I. I am going to read more on Amillennialism and Covenant Theology later, but right now I am still working on determining which is Biblical, 4 or 5 point Calvinism. And also, if 5-point "jibes" with Dispensationalism. But, in all honesty, I do not believe I will ever change my mind on Disp, Pretrib., Premill. theology.
And yes, I agree, the Highway has some fantastic articles and essays.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]But, in all honesty, I do not believe I will ever change my mind on Disp, Pretrib., Premill. theology.
I don't see how you can't. Sufficient answers, as Pilgirm noted, have been provided that Refutes Disp, pretrib secrect rapture ever since papa J. N. darby came on the scene with dispy in the early 1800's. Even Ladd's book(who's premil himself) devastates that system IMHO opinion. Exegetical issues aside, even the history of invention of the system shows that it is shaky... How Can the Church be "Waiting for this secret pretrib Rapture",which will not happen at "2nd coming" according to that system when PAUL himself says to the church in the Book of 1 Cor. to "eagerly [color:red]WAIT for our Lord Jesus Christ to be REVEALED" (1 cor 1:7) ? [scriptures are clear that this is the 2ND coming]. Also, you did not answer my question on what is the "2nd coming" according to what you believe. Link : 2ndComing
I pray that your study goes well on the 4 or 5 point issue, and that when you get to the study of the 2nd coming,dispy vs. covent. ,etc. that you will study it objectively.
God bless brother in Christ Carlos
"Let all that mind...the peace and comfort of their own souls, wholly apply themselves to the study of Jesus Christ, and him crucified"(Flavel)
Carlos, Here is the first Dispensation. Please tell me what part of it isn't Biblical.
Dispensation of Innocence Represenative - Adam Covenant - Edenic Command - Do not eat of one tree Promise - Life forever in the garden with God Failure - Eve listens to serpent, ignores Adam's authority, Adam ate of the forbidden tree Judgements - Shame (guilty conscience), Spiritual death (no fellowship with God), Confirmed disposition of enemity, curse on the serpent, promise of physical death, pain and sorrow in childbirth, pain and sorrow in tilling the earth (creation cursed), promise of a physical death, expulsion from the garden, man now lives in a hostile world ruled by a tyrant
God's provision of animal skins for Adam and Eve speaks of His first act of grace and redemption for fallen man by means of substitution, Adam and Eve who now have a conscience, are the first to experience redemption, foriveness and restoration.
Isn't this a moral period in the world's history which ends in a special judgement? Hasn't God revealed Himself to His people, or to the world, in a somewhat different pattern here than else where in the Bible? Wasn't the command to not eat of the fruit of a certain tree, different from other commands in the Bible?
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Also, you did not answer my questions on what is the "2nd coming" according to what you believe.</font><hr></blockquote><p> <br><br>The Second Coming is found in Chapter 19 of Revelation. This occurs before the millennium.<br>___________________________________________________<br><br>Also, in regard to my previous post, wasn't the command to not eat of the fruit of a certain tree, a command for a limited period of time? <br><br>
The DPM perception is built upon the hermeneutic that biblical history (revelation) should be divided into more or less seven individual dispensations. The majority of dispensationalists agree that a [color:red]dispensation is a period of time during which man is <span style="background-color:yellow;">tested</span> in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God.</font color=red> (New Scofield Bible, page 3). But, there is disagreement over exactly how many dispensations there really are: i.e. Dallas Theological Seminary officially holds to 3 (Law, Grace, & the Millennium, article 5), others hold four, some eight, however the basics are the same. Thus I ask, [color:blue]is confusion and inconsistency error?</font color=blue><br><br>The Biblical position (A-Mil [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]) affirms that since Adam fell short in the first test of obedience that no man can pass any test of obedience (he is fallen, he has a depraved nature, TULIP, pt 1: Total Depravity). Consequently, rather than saying, that in each dispensation man is being <span style="background-color:yellow;">tested</span> (we already recognize the end result is failure .. apart from the Divine intervention of grace) we believe, as Scripture teaches, to say that fallen man (post Gen 3) is shown throughout biblical history the way in which he can be delivered from sin & death through the power of God's grace.<br><br>Accordingly, when Adam fell short in the Covenant of Works (Gen 3) straight away God comes with a guarantee of the Redeemer who Adam could find salvation through (Gen 3:15). Thus, the A-Mil position stresses that the promise of redemption through the seed of the woman as the [color:blue]central theme</font color=blue> that is woven throughout biblical history & revelation (Gen-Rev) vs. the Dispy’s [color:blue]central theme</font color=blue> of man’s <span style="background-color:yellow;">testing</span>? [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/idea.gif" alt="idea" title="idea[/img]<br><br>Regardless of the diversity in administrations (O.T & N.T) there is only ever one Covenant of Grace. The O.T is the dispensation of types & shadows and the N.T is it's fulfillment—although we still long for the full consummation. <br><br>The A-Mil position biblically presents a progressive revelation of God's unfolding plan of salvation. However, the DPM offers a somewhat discontinuous plan that bares no relation to other dispensations and favors [color:red]disunity</font color=red> rather than [color:red]unity</font color=blue>. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/drop.gif" alt="drop" title="drop[/img] This is evident in the that orthodox DPM have always held the clear cut distinction of Israel & the Church. DPM accepts as true that Israel & the Church must at all times be kept separate. They assert that God's redemptive plans for Israel are absolutely separate from the Church—in fact, many promises are yet unfulfilled (the Mil Kingdom). <br><br>The A-Mil position rejects this separate plan scenario. Look at what Paul states in:<br><br><blockquote>[color:blue]Galatians 6:15-16 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And [color:red]as many as walk according to this rule</font color=red>, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon [color:red]the Israel of God</font color=red>. </font color=blue></blockquote> Who follows the [color:blue]rule</font color=blue>? Obviously, all those who are new creatures of Christ (Church), even the Gentiles. This would therefore have to include all regenerate believers, that is, regenerate Jews & Gentiles (note the wording circumcision and uncircumsion). Consequently, we see that Paul refers to the Church as [color:red]the Israel of God</font color=red>. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/idea.gif" alt="idea" title="idea[/img]<br><br> Peter also associates Israel with the Church (fulfillment), when he is addressing the Church, which is dispersed throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocuia... et. al. (1 Pet 1:1), saying, [color:blue]But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.</font color=blue> (1 Pet 2:9).<br><br>Now we note that Peter uses specific terminology to describe the N.T Church that were also expressive of Israel in the O.T. For example: <br><br><ul>[color:red]Chosen Generation</font color=red> - applied to Israel in:[/LIST]<blockquote>[color:blue]Isaiah 43:20 The beast of the field shall honour me, the dragons and the owls: because I give waters in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert, to give drink to my people, [color:red]my chosen</font color=red>.</font color=blue></blockquote> <ul>[color:red]A Royal Priesthood, an Holy Nation </font color=red> - applied to Israel in:[/LIST]<blockquote>[color:blue] Exodus 19:6 And ye shall be unto me a [color:red]kingdom of priests, and an holy nation</font color=red>. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.</blockquote></font color=blue><ul>[color:red]A Peculiar People</font color=red> - (God's possession) applied to Israel in:[/LIST]<blockquote>[color:blue] Exodus 19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then [color:red]ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people</font color=red>: for all the earth is mine.</blockquote></font color=blue> Paul uses the expression [color:blue]seed of Abraham</font color=blue> which in the O.T. meant not only the physical descendants of Abraham their father. Paul uses the term to include regenerate Gentiles in:<br><br><blockquote>[color:blue] Galatians 3:28-29 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are [color:red]ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise</font color=red>.</blockquote></font color=blue> Again, we note Paul states that those who are in Christ are [color:blue]Abraham's seed</font color=blue>, not in the physical sense of course, but in the spiritual sense. As a result, we see further confirmation of the identification of the Church as the true Israel and the those who have been blessed with the [color:blue]sure blessing of David.</font color=blue> <br><br><blockquote>[color:blue]Acts 13:38-39 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.</blockquote></font color=blue> Louis Berkhof also gives further examples (in his Systematic Theology, page 713):<br><br><blockquote>[color:blue]Matthew 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof .<br><br>Acts 2:29-36 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.<br><br>Acts 15:14-18 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.; <br><br>Romans 9:25-26 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.<br><br>Hebrews 8:8-13 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.; <br><br>Revelation 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.<br><br>Revelation 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.</blockquote></font color=blue> There is no uncertainty concerning the link between the O.T Saints & the N.T Saints. The evidence is overwhelming!<br><br>The Church, is thought of by DPM, as a parenthesis in God's dealings with the nation Israel is erroneous. They claim no continuity. But, continuity can be seen in numerous ways in the biblical (A-Mil) position: [color:blue]Qahal</font color=blue> is used to describe the congregation (assembly) of Israel in Exod 12:6; Num 14:5; Deut 5:22, Josh 8:35, et. al. It is enlightening to note that the LXX translates [color:blue]qahal</font color=blue> (assembly) as [color:red]ekklesia</font color=red> (church), so when the apostles use that same word for the Church it indicates some form of continuity between the people of God in the O.T & the N.T. <br><br>Similarly, the Apostles usage of the term [color:blue]temple of God</font color=blue> to describe the Church in:<br><br><blockquote>[color:blue]Ephesians 2:21-22 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto [color:red]an holy temple in the Lord</font color=red>: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.<br><br>1 Corinthians 3:16-17 Know ye not that ye are [color:red]the temple of God</font color=red>, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile [color:red]the temple of God</font color=red>, him shall God destroy; for [color:red]the temple of God</font color=red> is holy, which [color:red]temple ye are</font color=red>.</blockquote></font color=blue> This also shows the continuity from the O.T. where the [color:blue]Temple</font color=blue> was the place that God dwelt in a special & particular way. The same can be said of the term [color:blue]Jerusalem</font color=blue> when it refers to the Church:<br><br><blockquote>[color:blue]Hebrews 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, [color:red]the heavenly Jerusalem</font color=red>, and to an innumerable company of angels,<br><br>Revelation 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, [color:red]new Jerusalem</font color=red>, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.).</blockquote></font color=blue> Therefore the A-Mil position believes that God does [color:red]not</font color=red> have a separate purpose for Israel over and against the N.T Church. Indeed it is quite explicit there is no dividing walls between Jew & Gentile. Christ has Jew & Gentile together and both to himself in the one body through His redemptive work at the Cross. Did Christ have two different blood types? Were the red corpuscles for the Church and the white for Israel? Did Christ have two different bodies, one to die for Israel and another for the Gentiles? Is Christ divided? NO! <br><br>Since the partition has been removed how can we imagine that it shall be erected again in a dispensation yet to come (Mil Kingdom)? <br><br><blockquote>[color:blue]Ephesians 2:13-14 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us</blockquote></font color=blue>
Johannah..."But, in all honesty, I do not believe I will ever change my mind on Disp, Pretrib., Premill. theology."<br><br>William...I'm sorry to hear that. When I became reformed, I basically decided to really study the garbage I was taught under the pentecostal regime. Dispensational teachings were among the first to go. While I am no expert in this field, yet, I tend to be A-millenialist in my understandings. I am still looking into eschatology, but can be fairly assured that I will never return to dispy divisionary hemeneutics again.<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william
In reply to:[color:"blue"]The Second Coming is found in Chapter 19 of Revelation. This occurs before the millennium.
Ok. If that is the case, then please answer the question I just asked: How Can the Church be "Waiting for this secret pretrib Rapture", which will not happen at "2nd coming" according to that system when PAUL himself says to the church in the Book of 1 Cor. to "eagerly [color:red]WAIT for our Lord Jesus Christ to be REVEALED" (1 cor 1:7) ? [scriptures are clear that this is the 2ND coming!] and also says it in book of titus: “[color:red]waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ”. Also, I’ve listed passages in the the Books of 1 Thes. and 2 Thes. that all tie the Resurrection of the believers, “Gathering” Together of believers” & the Lord’s coming together. Joe and I have already given plethora of scriptures of “coming”, “Appearing”, and “revelation” as the 2nd coming. These Passages are explicitly clear and they’ve not been answered.
technically speaking that is NOT a second coming by your system but a 3RD coming!
In reply to:[color:"blue"]Also, in regard to my previous post, wasn't the command to not eat of the fruit of a certain tree, a command for a limited period of.
First, I’ll state what I believe about the covenant of Works. The Westminster Confession of Faith states:
II The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.
III Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace. wherein He freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.
see Hoseah 6:7, romans 5:12-21, and 1 cor 15:45. This is also stated nicely by one theologian who says “Although the Scripture does not explicitly call the arrangement with Adam a covenant of works it seems that this is certainly what the original arrangement with Mankind was. In Hosea 6:7 we read' "Like Adam they have broke the covenant-they have all been unfaithful to me. There was a covenantal arrangement with Adam There were contracting parties, Adam and his posterity and the Lord. There were stipulations, not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. There was a penalty for breaking the arrangement. There were rewards for keeping the covenant, you may eat freely from all the trees of the garden, as well in all probability the privilege of eating from the tree of Life. The trees, at least in some respects, were signs and seals of the covenant.”
[color:red]As far as the anwer to your question, I let A. A. Hodge state it:
15. In what sense is the Covenant of Works abolished, and in what sense is it in force? This Covenant having been broken by Adam, not one of his natural descendants is ever able to fulfill its conditions, and Christ having fulfilled all of its conditions in behalf of all his own people, salvation is offered now on the condition of faith. In this sense the Covenant of Works having been fulfilled by the second Adam is henceforth abrogated under the gospel. Nevertheless, since it is founded upon the principles of immutable justice, it still binds all men who have not fled to the refuge offered in the righteousness of Christ. It is true that “he that doeth these things shall live that them.” and “the soul that sinneth it shall die.” This law in this sense remains, and in consequence of the unrighteousness of men condemns them, and in consequence of their absolute inability to fulfill it, it acts as a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ. For he having fulfilled alike its condition wherein Adam failed, and its penalty which Adam incurred, he has become the end of this covenant for righteousness to every one who believes, who in him is regarded and treated as one who has fulfilled the covenant, and merited its promised reward.
Brother in Christ, Carlos
"Let all that mind...the peace and comfort of their own souls, wholly apply themselves to the study of Jesus Christ, and him crucified"(Flavel)
averagefellar said:<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]When I became reformed, I basically decited to really study the garbage I was taught under the pentecostal regime. Dispensational teachings were amoung the first to go.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>After I moved from Nebraska, I could not find a good church in the state I moved to, so I tried the Pentecostal scene a short time. I was very naive. I had no idea how unbiblical they are. Never again! If you haven't had a good Bible teaching background, it's easy to get suckered into something like that. Even though you are no longer Dispy (I've learned a new word!), you are, without a doubt, better off now.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]Therefore the A-Mil position believes that God does not have a separate purpose for Israel over and aginst the N.T. Church.......Did Christ have two different blood types? Were the red corpuscles for the Church and the white for Israel? Did Christ have two different bodies, one to die for Israel and another for the Gentiles? NO! Now since the partition has been removed how can we imagine that it shall be erected again in a dispensation yet to come?
In the dispensation of the Kingdom, all will be believers. After children are born they will still be believers, (how could they not be, since Christ will be right there?), but some will be rebellious and eventually fight on the side of Satan. This is not as far-fetched as it sounds. After all, the Demons believe, Satan believes.
The partition has been removed. We Christins are spiritual decendents of Abraham. God made promises to the Jews. The Jews were unfaithful, God was not. Just because the Jews didn't fulfill their part of the "bargain" doesn't mean God won't. When God makes a promise, He always keeps it, no matter what. He promised them a King, and He will deliver. As far as what will happen in the future, we must not try to paint God in a corner, and say You must always do things this way. I don't know what kinds of partitions will be in Heaven, and neither do you.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]The A-Mil position biblically presents a progressive revelation of God's unfolding plan of salvation. However, the DPM offers a somewhat discontinuous plan that bares no relation to other dispensations and favor disunity rather than unity.
Not true. God's plan of salvation is the same in each of these periods of history. All of these dispensations lead up to, in one way or another, the substitutionary death of Christ on the cross.
I want to quote a paragraph I found in "Dispensationalism Today" by Charles C. Ryrie: Theoretically the sine qua non ought to lie in the recognition of the fact the God has distinquishably different economies in governing the affairs of the world. Covenant theologians hold that there are various dispensations (and even use the word!) within the outworking of the covenant of grace. Hodge, for instance, believed that there are four dispensations after the Fall - Adam to Abraham, Abraham to Moses, Moses to Christ, and Christ to the end. Louis Berkhof writes of only two basic dispensations - the Old and the New, but within the Old he sees four periods and all of these are revelation of the covenant of grace. In other words, a man can believe in dispensations, and even see them in relation to progressive relation, without being a dispensationalist.
Most of the criticisms you have made in other posts about "Dispy" are answered by Ryrie in this book.
Matt. 21:43 means taken from that generation. The Kingdom of God was taken from them and given to the Church.
Joe, I do understand that after what the Jews did to Christ that everything changed for them, and it changed for the worse, unless they became Christians, and most didn't. They did lose their special place - in some way. I'm not missing that.
carlos said:<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]technically speaking that is NOT a second coming by your system but a 3RD coming!</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Some theologians say the Second Coming is in two parts. Maybe that is the answer that will satisfy you.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Joe and I have already given plethora of scriptures of "coming", "Appearing", and "revelation" as the 2nd coming. these passages are explicitly clear and they've not been answered.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br><br>I said in another post that I don't have the commentaries I need to respond to this. I have exackly one set. Examining these words or Bible verses under a microscope is the right way to go about Bible study, but I don't have what I need in my home to do that.<br><br>Some of these passages are referring to Tribulation believers. Some of the passages are referring to the Rapture. Sometimes my commentary says who and what the verse is referring to and sometimes it doesn't.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]In the dispensation of the Kingdom, [color:red]all will be believers. After children are born they will still be believers, (how could they not be, since Christ will be right there?), but some will be rebellious and eventually fight on the side of Satan. This is not as far-fetched as it sounds. After all, the Demons believe, Satan believes.
Now, how does one, who is a Christian, lose his salvation in the Mil dispensation, as compared not being able to lose it in this present dispensation? How are people born Christians? Does the Mil dispensation do away with faith if one can be born a Christian? How did Adam and Eve sin, God was right there?
And what is it that the demons believe? The text says they believe [color:blue]that there is one God and not that they believe in the redemptive work of Christ. James here is comparing true faith and pretense faith. James point is that no fallen angel can claim salvation by merely reciting certain facts of the true faith—the fact here being [color:blue]that there is one God. God is not some cosmic-genie who when rubbed by the mere reciting of Scriptural facts is induced to do anything, including making one a Christian. This reminds me of the Faith movement: Name it, Claim it, Satanize it! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/puke.gif" alt="puke" title="puke[/img]
In reply to:[color:"blue"]The partition has been removed. We Christins are spiritual decendents of Abraham. God made promises to the Jews. The Jews were unfaithful, God was not. Just because the Jews didn't fulfill their part of the "bargain" doesn't mean God won't. When God makes a promise, He always keeps it, no matter what. He promised them a King, and He will deliver. As far as what will happen in the future, we must not try to paint God in a corner, and say You must always do things this way. I don't know what kinds of partitions will be in Heaven, and neither do you.
The point was that there are no partitions, the Church is Israel, but in the DPM you must reconstruct this “partition” for as you yourself just said, [color:blue]the partition has been removed. A huge fallacy for DPM.
In reply to:[color:"blue"] Covenant theologians hold that there are various dispensations (and even use the word!) within the outworking of the covenant of grace. Hodge, for instance, believed that there are four dispensations after the Fall - Adam to Abraham, Abraham to Moses, Moses to Christ, and Christ to the end. Louis Berkhof writes of only two basic dispensations - the Old and the New, but within the Old he sees four periods and all of these are revelation of the covenant of grace. In other words, a man can believe in dispensations, and even see them in relation to progressive relation, without being a dispensationalist. Most of the criticisms you have made in other posts about "Dispy" are answered by Ryrie in this book.
I am sorry but I fail to see your point. Of course, we see dispensations—the historical text and its natural divisions. Different men have held to a different number of dispensations, BUT they held them for “different” reasons than the Dispies attempt to quote them, thus making an error of equivocation. How the dispensations are interpreted is what we are discussing! Within the covenant of grace, I could divide Scripture into several historical segments, each revealing the glory of God and the continual Church of God. But, there is still only ONE covenant here, though divided into several historical segments.
Ryie in quoting Berkhof does great dis-service to his cause. If his cause is to preach truth then why does he make it appear as if Berkhof supports the DPM system? This is poor scholarship and poor discipleship. Anyone picking up Berkhof’s systematic can read this wording about DPM:
[color:blue]The theory is based on a literal interpretation of the prophetic delineations of the future of Israel and the Kingdom of God, which is entirely untenable…. The so-called postponement theory, which is a necessary link in the premillennial scheme, is devoid of all Scriptural basis ….There is no positive Scriptural foundation whatsoever for the Premillennial view of a double, or even a three- or fourfold resurrection, as their theory requires, nor for spreading the last judgment over a period of thousand years by dividing it into three judgments….
Berkhof has multiple pages against the DPM theory.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]Joe, I do understand that after what the Jews did to Christ that everything changed for them, and it changed for the worse, unless they became Christians, and most didn't. They did lose their special place - in some way. I'm not missing that.
This is the major problem—the separation of Israel and the Church. Until you see the unity of the Scripture here, as presented in my other post, the error will remain. The church and Israel as ONE is a major hang-up and not only when speaking about eschatology!
thanks for the correction. I thought He was from skimming His commentary on revelation(The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation) a while back. I thought I remembered his comments on rev 20 being pre-mil. Maybe I had confused him with someone else. Maybe my trusted memory is becomign like that of 
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/read.gif)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.the-highway.com/forumuserpics/RefDoc_sig.gif)
