Yup, one revision came around 1865 with the realization that "church" really just means "a called group", and the 2nd group we see Christ forming as a mystery (not searchable in OT prophecy) after the Sanhedrin murdered Stephen, giving witness full of the Spirit of Israel's Messiah, are those after that "diminishing" event. These are mentioned in Galatians 2:7 as those believers of the "uncircumsision" administered exclusively by Paul. Later in Paul's ministry, he alone calls them "the Body of Christ" and abruptly he ceases the use of the water Mikvah (baptism) lest the teaching of "the cross be made of non effect" by orders from the risen Christ. Those dispensationalist's that "rightly divide" Israel and the "Body of Christ" are called mid-Acts dispensationalists. Very simple, No baptizing, No membership (except a quorum to satisfy the state), No tithing requirement, and No legalistic mandated church attendance - everything by free-will Grace. These are small, non-authoritarian churches numbering in the thousands worldwide and many are hiding behind a Baptist sign while their baptistry now gathers dust and cobwebs. They teach all scripture is for edification, but only Romans to Philemon is written by Paul for our instruction and obedience. Israel's remaining 7 year prophetic timetable was set "in abeyance" and Paul is considered like a Moses type leader until the day of our rapture. Consider both Moses and Paul come from wealth, affluence and education and gave it up for poverty, both had their ministry start with the death of an innocent man, both God had to save their lives in a basket (by actions of a family member), in both they could not die from a serpent's bite, in both God healed the sick, and in both God directly called them without any human mediator. There's a few more similarities (compared in the 50's by C.R. Stam) but suffice it to say, God was sending some signals here... Without Paul, Christianity would not even exist today. He was called to be the #1 prominent New Testament writer and the church at large today still thinks he's just the same as "chicken little Peter" who had to be reprimanded by Paul. Peter disappears after Acts 15 and leaves charge of the already diminishing church in Jerusalem to the legalistic James (the Lord's half-brother) who we can see doing proud law keeping and temple duty years later in Acts 21. The last chapter Peter writes before dying is to explain to Christian Jews running from persecution to other cities, why God was "not slack" concerning their long awaited earthly Kingdom, acquiescing to say Paul had those answers. One more interesting factoid: Almost the total content of the much famed Greek "Textus Receptus" (NT source texts) was transported in the early centuries by the persecuted, non-baptizing, Pauline groups like the Paulician's, Bogomil's, Cathar's and the Waldesian's right up until the times of the reformation. Up until that time, the RCC had thought it had successfully locked the content of the Bible inside the dead language of Latin for use by their priests from Hell. It was these same Romish Cretin's that re-wrote and marred the history of these aforementioned 4 groups who protected the writings that would eventually be compared, collated, assembled, and translated into what we now know as source for the six English Bibles leading up to the 7th - the KJV Bible. Sorry for going long, but a long history and the actions of men with free-will tends to be a complex thing. Satan as well, did not want to have the accurate transmission of God's Word - and he has played that tune ever since Eden. "Yea, Hath god said?" - Grace and peace to ye all 🥰🤗
With all this you have basically said nothing. You have however exposed your unsaved, Biblically illiterate state though. Mankind does NOT have freewill. Dispensationalism is NOT the Christianity of the Bible. There is NO rapture, no 1,000 year reign. Israel is completely and permanently out of the picture. They have nothing to do with anything. And there is no such thing as satan. Like all the people of all the churches that are all 100% apostate, everything you believe and hold to is unbiblical nonsense. Repent, and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
The Reformation is a good point against about the "newness" argument of dispensationalism. Another example is the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. Christians wrestled and argued with the issues over time - hence the development. And still another example is that none of the current end time positions of today are exact replicas of those from the early church. Also for those who say dispensationalism teaches two ways of salvation, they either fail to understand (or refuse to see) that dispensationalism is about eschatology (end times) and ecclesiology (Israel and the Church). There isn't a singular "dispensational soteriology" (salvation) position. Some dispensationalists are Arminians, some are Calvinists, and others take views such as Molinism. When I want to learn about a view not my own, I search for reliable sources and ask people questions who hold that view. I first seek to understand. I don't want to jump in with inaccurate criticism, because I don't want to misrepresent them. A misrepresented view is not the truth, it is false. As a Christian, I am more concerned about the truth than my feelings. It should be every Christian's duty to represent others accurately, even if they disagree with them.
A Christians duty is to understand, represent, and present the actual truth of the Bible correctly. And the sad fact is, there is NO church that does this. Everything known as the church is apostate and it all sells a 100% counterfeit (antichrist) christianity. There are NO Christians in the church, any church. Dispensationalism is NOT the Christianity of the Bible.
Sorry, from that terse "one liner" I was not 100% clear on which side you stand.. Aught we to be ready to account for what we hold dear, Yes? (I took some time in my post above, why not you too brother?🤗). Dispensationalist thought arose healthy like a mini reformation in the early 1800's and enjoyed the rigor's of healthy debate, until it's progress was stunted by 2 world wars, an atomic bomb, and American evangelicalism. What say you?
@@kwpctek9190 No thank you. I spend a lot of time doing that. I have post after post on social media, and an upcoming podcast to deal with it, but I don't have the energy for another full-length discussion. I posted tersely because I believe that current Dispensationalists need to normalize putting this reality out there. People need it to see over and over, to counterbalance the nonsense they will see said about Dispensationalism 90% of the time they find it mentioned. It may well encourage deeper research, and the curiosity to check out the best Dispensationalism has to offer. Foolish nonsense like the "newness" of Dispensationalism, which totally misses the recency of all in-depth eschatalogical formulation, kenards like "Darby invented the pre-trib rapture in 1830," the "two people of God" misrepresentation, and most of all, the vapid focus on popular level sensationalism, which is a late 20th century phenomenon, that represents a minority of Dispensational thought for a minority of Dispensational history. I use my real name everywhere, so if you're on Messenger, feel free to contact me, but this is not a good platform for serious dialogue.
I respectfully disagree. My issue with dispensationalism is that it divides scripture unnecessarily, and I believe Ephesians 2 and Romans 11 disprove dispensationalism. There are no longer two separate groups of God’s people, but through Christ there is one. Israel has been expanded into the church, like a caterpillar becoming a butterfly. When I used to be dispensational, my reading of the Old Testament was much different than it is now. Since embracing 1689 federalism, the Old Testament feels much more natural and consistent through the plan of redemption. Those who hold to covenant theology have much to learn about our dispensationalist brothers and sisters, and I’m grateful to God for them.
@@Nathan-mf2yz Well, I welcome disagreement. We will all know when we meet God. But He's not gonna ask us about our system, He's gonna ask us about how we handled His word, and I'd rather be found having utilized the same literal-grammatical-historical hermeneutic by which we find such doctrinal truths as the Trinity, Deity of Christ & Justification by Faith. I think it's a kenard when people talk about how Dispensationalism divides scripture, because there are certain things central to the system, and certain things that aren't. The popular level sensationalism among non-scholar pastors has been responsible for numbering the Dispensations, and giving minute treatments about how and when each one is ministered, but those things belong to the "add ons," that are not central at all to the system, nor does one ever have to involve oneself with it. The central issue of Dispensationalism, is the absolute faithfulness of God to His promises. He made many promises to national Israel, that cannot be applied to anybody else; not the church or Christ. These promises certainly will be fulfilled through Christ, but not by Him. That being said, it's not a "theory" that the LORD has interacted in different ways with people at different times. That's unavoidable in scripture. In the NT alone, God deals with people in at least 3 different administrations (before Christ dies, the Acts church, and the after Acts church). That doesn't alter any doctrine at all. Everyone is still saved the same way. The fact remains though, of a distinction between the church and Israel. Paul says plainly in Romans 9, "to Israel belong, the promises and covenants." There is a clear distinction between the offspring of Abraham by faith, and the actual physical descendents, and NOWHERE does scripture deny this. It goes back to people reading scripture through the lens of "redemptive history" as if that's all there is. Redemption is amazing, and the fact that God would save a people is a glorious truth, but that's not all He's doing in scripture. Scripture is mainly the story of God glorifying Himself, and He does this in myriad ways. So there are no "two people of God" in the redemptive sense. Israel's covenant exists, with land promises, and the promise of a literal kingdom. Scripture never, ever comes close to reversing this. I am a charter member of my church, a 1689 Confessionally Reformed Baptist church. I love my brothers, but the fact is that, I don't see how anybody can deny, that to spiritualize and allegorize clear and repeated prophetic promises to Israel, cannot seriously be said to be the superior application of exegesis. It boggles my mind anyone could ever think that. No, covenant theology simply does not deal with prophetic scripture, with the same method of hermeneutics it does elsewhere, and that's an issue. It's a massive issue, that scripture cannot be used to support.
@@Nathan-mf2yz My observation is that two passages alone, do not a solid doctrine make, because in viewing all scripture in the light of the 1500+ years God chose too reveal it to man, there are things in the early portions that do not apply to us now (except for our leaning), and there are things still yet to apply for those living in the future (after the Pauline Body of Christ is snatched away to the heavens). We read scripture in the same way we'd read an unfolding story where some parts are man's experience and God's response, while others are prophetic (those done and still yet to unfold), and still others were kept secret since the beginning (like Paul says about the *unprophesied and unsearchable* existence of the Body of Christ as the lynch-pin in the plan of Satan's complete downfall). You seem to read the Bible as having it's chief goal as the salvation of mankind, but that is only part of God's plan of restitution (should any of us respond to God's bona-fide offer of reconciliation). Brother, you miss God's 3 part larger plan in favor of hyper-focusing on what's in it for you (important personally, though merely salvific to just one). God's complete plan is at least this much bigger on the grand scale: 1) The redemption of the earth by the reborn nation of Israel (yet to come) 2) The redemption of the heavens (not the 3rd heaven) by the Body of Christ to cure the problem found in Job 15:15 and Job 25:5 3) The consummation of all things in heaven and earth under the headship of Christ will be offered up to the praise and glory of God the Father
Ok, great. Now tell us where the Scriptures came from. Did the Bible fall out of the sky? Of course not! The Orthodox Church was led by the Holy Spirit in compiling and canonizing them. The Scriptures derive their authority from the Church. Not the other way around.
Where was the Orthodox Church when 74% of the Bible including Psalm 119:89-96 was written? It didn't even exist. The permanence of God’s Word states, “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven… Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.”
Actually, the entirety of Scripture, both Old and New Testaments were written by Jewish men who were believers in the God of Israel and the Messiah of Israel, and now that faith is available to "whosoever will". Church edicts and disparaging statements from both Rome and Constantinople would drive the Messianic Jewish believers to forced assimilation by the late 4th century.
You have spoken absolute ignorance! The scriptures (the 66 books of the Bible) came from God. No church, no man, nor group of men had anything whatsoever to do with producing the Bible. The Bible is Gods book! NOT the 100% apostate churches book! Orthodoxy/catholicism are Godless abominations. They are the religions of the accursed of God, of the spiritually dead and blind, and of the brute beasts made only to be destroyed that have corrupted themselves in this Godless abomination. Repent! "But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;" 2 Peter 2:12 KJV "But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves." Jude 1:10 KJV
Excellent! Contending for the truths of a literal Bible understanding.
Very clear. Very important.
Did anyone in church history, before JN Darby, teach that Christ would build another temple and reinstitute animal sacrifices?
Yup, one revision came around 1865 with the realization that "church" really just means "a called group", and the 2nd group we see Christ forming as a mystery (not searchable in OT prophecy) after the Sanhedrin murdered Stephen, giving witness full of the Spirit of Israel's Messiah, are those after that "diminishing" event. These are mentioned in Galatians 2:7 as those believers of the "uncircumsision" administered exclusively by Paul. Later in Paul's ministry, he alone calls them "the Body of Christ" and abruptly he ceases the use of the water Mikvah (baptism) lest the teaching of "the cross be made of non effect" by orders from the risen Christ. Those dispensationalist's that "rightly divide" Israel and the "Body of Christ" are called mid-Acts dispensationalists. Very simple, No baptizing, No membership (except a quorum to satisfy the state), No tithing requirement, and No legalistic mandated church attendance - everything by free-will Grace. These are small, non-authoritarian churches numbering in the thousands worldwide and many are hiding behind a Baptist sign while their baptistry now gathers dust and cobwebs. They teach all scripture is for edification, but only Romans to Philemon is written by Paul for our instruction and obedience. Israel's remaining 7 year prophetic timetable was set "in abeyance" and Paul is considered like a Moses type leader until the day of our rapture. Consider both Moses and Paul come from wealth, affluence and education and gave it up for poverty, both had their ministry start with the death of an innocent man, both God had to save their lives in a basket (by actions of a family member), in both they could not die from a serpent's bite, in both God healed the sick, and in both God directly called them without any human mediator. There's a few more similarities (compared in the 50's by C.R. Stam) but suffice it to say, God was sending some signals here... Without Paul, Christianity would not even exist today. He was called to be the #1 prominent New Testament writer and the church at large today still thinks he's just the same as "chicken little Peter" who had to be reprimanded by Paul. Peter disappears after Acts 15 and leaves charge of the already diminishing church in Jerusalem to the legalistic James (the Lord's half-brother) who we can see doing proud law keeping and temple duty years later in Acts 21. The last chapter Peter writes before dying is to explain to Christian Jews running from persecution to other cities, why God was "not slack" concerning their long awaited earthly Kingdom, acquiescing to say Paul had those answers.
One more interesting factoid: Almost the total content of the much famed Greek "Textus Receptus" (NT source texts) was transported in the early centuries by the persecuted, non-baptizing, Pauline groups like the Paulician's, Bogomil's, Cathar's and the Waldesian's right up until the times of the reformation. Up until that time, the RCC had thought it had successfully locked the content of the Bible inside the dead language of Latin for use by their priests from Hell. It was these same Romish Cretin's that re-wrote and marred the history of these aforementioned 4 groups who protected the writings that would eventually be compared, collated, assembled, and translated into what we now know as source for the six English Bibles leading up to the 7th - the KJV Bible.
Sorry for going long, but a long history and the actions of men with free-will tends to be a complex thing. Satan as well, did not want to have the accurate transmission of God's Word - and he has played that tune ever since Eden. "Yea, Hath god said?"
- Grace and peace to ye all 🥰🤗
With all this you have basically said nothing. You have however exposed your unsaved, Biblically illiterate state though.
Mankind does NOT have freewill. Dispensationalism is NOT the Christianity of the Bible. There is NO rapture, no 1,000 year reign. Israel is completely and permanently out of the picture. They have nothing to do with anything. And there is no such thing as satan.
Like all the people of all the churches that are all 100% apostate, everything you believe and hold to is unbiblical nonsense. Repent, and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
The Reformation is a good point against about the "newness" argument of dispensationalism. Another example is the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. Christians wrestled and argued with the issues over time - hence the development. And still another example is that none of the current end time positions of today are exact replicas of those from the early church.
Also for those who say dispensationalism teaches two ways of salvation, they either fail to understand (or refuse to see) that dispensationalism is about eschatology (end times) and ecclesiology (Israel and the Church). There isn't a singular "dispensational soteriology" (salvation) position. Some dispensationalists are Arminians, some are Calvinists, and others take views such as Molinism.
When I want to learn about a view not my own, I search for reliable sources and ask people questions who hold that view. I first seek to understand. I don't want to jump in with inaccurate criticism, because I don't want to misrepresent them. A misrepresented view is not the truth, it is false. As a Christian, I am more concerned about the truth than my feelings. It should be every Christian's duty to represent others accurately, even if they disagree with them.
A Christians duty is to understand, represent, and present the actual truth of the Bible correctly. And the sad fact is, there is NO church that does this. Everything known as the church is apostate and it all sells a 100% counterfeit (antichrist) christianity. There are NO Christians in the church, any church.
Dispensationalism is NOT the Christianity of the Bible.
Misconceptions, lies, slander & misrepresentation, and "allegorical" interpretation are the main reason most Christians oppose Dispensationalism.
Sorry, from that terse "one liner" I was not 100% clear on which side you stand.. Aught we to be ready to account for what we hold dear, Yes?
(I took some time in my post above, why not you too brother?🤗). Dispensationalist thought arose healthy like a mini reformation in the early 1800's and enjoyed the rigor's of healthy debate, until it's progress was stunted by 2 world wars, an atomic bomb, and American evangelicalism. What say you?
@@kwpctek9190 No thank you. I spend a lot of time doing that. I have post after post on social media, and an upcoming podcast to deal with it, but I don't have the energy for another full-length discussion. I posted tersely because I believe that current Dispensationalists need to normalize putting this reality out there. People need it to see over and over, to counterbalance the nonsense they will see said about Dispensationalism 90% of the time they find it mentioned. It may well encourage deeper research, and the curiosity to check out the best Dispensationalism has to offer.
Foolish nonsense like the "newness" of Dispensationalism, which totally misses the recency of all in-depth eschatalogical formulation, kenards like "Darby invented the pre-trib rapture in 1830," the "two people of God" misrepresentation, and most of all, the vapid focus on popular level sensationalism, which is a late 20th century phenomenon, that represents a minority of Dispensational thought for a minority of Dispensational history.
I use my real name everywhere, so if you're on Messenger, feel free to contact me, but this is not a good platform for serious dialogue.
I respectfully disagree. My issue with dispensationalism is that it divides scripture unnecessarily, and I believe Ephesians 2 and Romans 11 disprove dispensationalism. There are no longer two separate groups of God’s people, but through Christ there is one. Israel has been expanded into the church, like a caterpillar becoming a butterfly. When I used to be dispensational, my reading of the Old Testament was much different than it is now. Since embracing 1689 federalism, the Old Testament feels much more natural and consistent through the plan of redemption. Those who hold to covenant theology have much to learn about our dispensationalist brothers and sisters, and I’m grateful to God for them.
@@Nathan-mf2yz Well, I welcome disagreement. We will all know when we meet God. But He's not gonna ask us about our system, He's gonna ask us about how we handled His word, and I'd rather be found having utilized the same literal-grammatical-historical hermeneutic by which we find such doctrinal truths as the Trinity, Deity of Christ & Justification by Faith.
I think it's a kenard when people talk about how Dispensationalism divides scripture, because there are certain things central to the system, and certain things that aren't. The popular level sensationalism among non-scholar pastors has been responsible for numbering the Dispensations, and giving minute treatments about how and when each one is ministered, but those things belong to the "add ons," that are not central at all to the system, nor does one ever have to involve oneself with it.
The central issue of Dispensationalism, is the absolute faithfulness of God to His promises. He made many promises to national Israel, that cannot be applied to anybody else; not the church or Christ. These promises certainly will be fulfilled through Christ, but not by Him.
That being said, it's not a "theory" that the LORD has interacted in different ways with people at different times. That's unavoidable in scripture. In the NT alone, God deals with people in at least 3 different administrations (before Christ dies, the Acts church, and the after Acts church). That doesn't alter any doctrine at all. Everyone is still saved the same way.
The fact remains though, of a distinction between the church and Israel. Paul says plainly in Romans 9, "to Israel belong, the promises and covenants." There is a clear distinction between the offspring of Abraham by faith, and the actual physical descendents, and NOWHERE does scripture deny this. It goes back to people reading scripture through the lens of "redemptive history" as if that's all there is. Redemption is amazing, and the fact that God would save a people is a glorious truth, but that's not all He's doing in scripture. Scripture is mainly the story of God glorifying Himself, and He does this in myriad ways. So there are no "two people of God" in the redemptive sense. Israel's covenant exists, with land promises, and the promise of a literal kingdom. Scripture never, ever comes close to reversing this.
I am a charter member of my church, a 1689 Confessionally Reformed Baptist church. I love my brothers, but the fact is that, I don't see how anybody can deny, that to spiritualize and allegorize clear and repeated prophetic promises to Israel, cannot seriously be said to be the superior application of exegesis. It boggles my mind anyone could ever think that. No, covenant theology simply does not deal with prophetic scripture, with the same method of hermeneutics it does elsewhere, and that's an issue. It's a massive issue, that scripture cannot be used to support.
@@Nathan-mf2yz My observation is that two passages alone, do not a solid doctrine make, because in viewing all scripture in the light of the 1500+ years God chose too reveal it to man, there are things in the early portions that do not apply to us now (except for our leaning), and there are things still yet to apply for those living in the future (after the Pauline Body of Christ is snatched away to the heavens). We read scripture in the same way we'd read an unfolding story where some parts are man's experience and God's response, while others are prophetic (those done and still yet to unfold), and still others were kept secret since the beginning (like Paul says about the *unprophesied and unsearchable* existence of the Body of Christ as the lynch-pin in the plan of Satan's complete downfall). You seem to read the Bible as having it's chief goal as the salvation of mankind, but that is only part of God's plan of restitution (should any of us respond to God's bona-fide offer of reconciliation). Brother, you miss God's 3 part larger plan in favor of hyper-focusing on what's in it for you (important personally, though merely salvific to just one).
God's complete plan is at least this much bigger on the grand scale:
1) The redemption of the earth by the reborn nation of Israel (yet to come)
2) The redemption of the heavens (not the 3rd heaven) by the Body of Christ to cure the problem found in Job 15:15 and Job 25:5
3) The consummation of all things in heaven and earth under the headship of Christ will be offered up to the praise and glory of God the Father
False teaching
Ok, great. Now tell us where the Scriptures came from. Did the Bible fall out of the sky? Of course not! The Orthodox Church was led by the Holy Spirit in compiling and canonizing them. The Scriptures derive their authority from the Church. Not the other way around.
Where was the Orthodox Church when 74% of the Bible including Psalm 119:89-96 was written? It didn't even exist. The permanence of God’s Word states, “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven… Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.”
Actually, the entirety of Scripture, both Old and New Testaments were written by Jewish men who were believers in the God of Israel and the Messiah of Israel, and now that faith is available to "whosoever will". Church edicts and disparaging statements from both Rome and Constantinople would drive the Messianic Jewish believers to forced assimilation by the late 4th century.
You have spoken absolute ignorance! The scriptures (the 66 books of the Bible) came from God. No church, no man, nor group of men had anything whatsoever to do with producing the Bible. The Bible is Gods book! NOT the 100% apostate churches book!
Orthodoxy/catholicism are Godless abominations. They are the religions of the accursed of God, of the spiritually dead and blind, and of the brute beasts made only to be destroyed that have corrupted themselves in this Godless abomination. Repent!
"But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;" 2 Peter 2:12 KJV
"But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves." Jude 1:10 KJV