@FAITHandLOGIC The early church co-opted early pagan holidays to help bring pagans to Christ. Christians who celebrate Easter do not worship a pagan God but the risin Christ who died for us at Golgatha and was ressurected on the third day. On Christmas we are not worshiping Mithras but the fact that God so loved us he became human and Emmanuel God is with us.
God knows what is in our hearts and knows that even if they started as pagan holidays, now it is all about Jesus
Hello, sir. I found this looking for opposing viewpoints to critically examine my own position. While I agree with much of what you've said here, including the exhortation to live righteously, I don't think you fully understand what you're criticizing. When I first heard the idea of different gospels in the tribulation, OT, NT, and millenium I thought it was insane, but it's absolutely true. See Matt. 19:16-17 & Acts 16:30-31. Those are two completely different responses. How do you explain it?
@ChristianTruthHammer I think my main problem with dispensationilism is because #1 it makes Jesus out to be a false apocalyptic prophet if in Matthew 24 during the Olivet Discourse up through Matthew 24:35 is concerning the fall of Jerouselem in 70 AD
My 2nd problem like I said is that not all but most dispensationilists seem to not think that Jesus' commands apply to them and that frightens me. The Sermon on the Mount is Jesus' manifesto, how those who belong to the Kingdom shouldm be
Firstly, the Old Testament saints believed in the Messiah and that He would take away their transgressions by His death (ISAIAH 53) - and EPHESIANS 5:25 says "Christ loved THE CHURCH and gave Himself FOR HER" - not "the Church AND ISRAEL".
Secondly, EPH.1:22-23 state that "THE CHURCH" is the BODY of Christ. And EPH.3:6 says "the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of THE SAME BODY".
Right, that's why his disciples were so supportive when he said he had to die (Matthew 16:21-22). Oh wait...
That's not what Eph 1:22-23 says, but the concept is granted. Gal 2:20 says Christ gave himself for Paul, not Paul and everybody who would ever believe on him. I guess that puts us in a rotten mess!
Yes, Gentiles are also of the same body: the body of Christ, which is the church. But the church is not Israel. When a Jew gets saved he is no longer a Jew, he's a Christian.
/// that's why his disciples/jews were so supportive when he said he had to die Matthew 16:21-22///
You're forgetting... God, AT THAT TIME, had purposefully "blinded" them from seeing what the Scriptures said (see LUKE 9:45 - "But they (the apostles) did not understand this saying, and IT WAS CONCEALED FROM THEM, SO THAT THEY MIGHT NOT PERCEIVE IT").
God blinded men's hearts so that they carry out His ONE AND ONLY REASON for coming - to DIE FOR SIN (John 12:27, 18:37)
Let me clarify... There are TWO "Israels" mentioned in Scripture...
Romans 9:6-8, 2:28 and 11:1-7 clearly tell us that only the ELECT human beings "OUT OF" the ethnic 'nation' of Israel are part of the true people of God - i.e. SPIRITUAL Israel.
The rest, (i.e. the REPROBATE "OUT OF" the ethnic 'nation' of Israel have absolutely no part with the TRUE people of God.
SPIRITUAL Israel = The Church, which is the body of the ELECT.
/// When a Jew gets saved he is no longer a Jew, he's a Christian. ///
TRUE Old Testament Jews WERE Christians - The only difference was that they had FORWARD POINTING saving-faith in the coming Messiah, by GRACE, THROUGH faith IN the one and only Mediator. Jesus said "Abraham saw My day, AND WAS GLAD" (John 8:56).
All of God's people are ONE and are MEMBERS OF THE SAME BODY, the Church.
The Church is defined as "The Body of Christ's Elect - OT & NT"
"The only difference was that they had FORWARD POINTING saving-faith in the coming Messiah"
That contradicts so many clear scriptures indicating OT salvation under the law was by faith and works, including but not limited to Matthew 19:16-17 (cf. Heb 9:13-17, Acts 16:30-31), Romans 10:1-5 cf. Deuteronomy 6:25, and Ezekiel 3:20, 18:21-28. Abraham is a terrible example to refute that because he lived before the law. See also 1 Corinthians 2:7-8.
Hebrews 11 doesn't say anything about justification.
You're making Jesus a liar in Matthew 19.
The significance of Hebrews 9 there is that the New Testament and the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ was not in effect until Christ died. Read it. I pointed to Acts 16 because that's after the cross. Different answer to the same question as Matthew 19. Romans 10 repeatedly mentions the righteousness which is of the law: works. Hence Deuteronomy 6:25.
/// Hebrews 11 doesn't say about justification. ///
Heb 11:4, "By faith, Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, THROUGH WHICH HE WAS COMMENDED AS RIGHTEOUS"
Heb 11:7, "By faith, Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear, constructed an ark... By this he condemned the world AND BECAME AN HEIR OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS THAT COMES BY FAITH."
Heb 11:39, "And all these...COMMENDED (justified) THROUGH THEIR FAITH"
Nope. I'm going along with ROMANS 3:20 - "FOR BY WORKS OF THE LAW, NO HUMAN BEING WILL BE JUSTIFIED...SINCE THROUGH THE LAW COMES THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN"
You are the one twisting the Lord's words. Scripture does not contradict itself.
Psalm 143:2 says "...FOR NO ONE LIVING IS RIGHTEOUS BEFORE YOU"
Irrelevant. The O.T. Christians had a FORWARD believing saving faith in the exact same COMING Messiah.
Now that the Messiah has come, we no longer need that FORWARD believe, but we now look BACKWARDS to the very same Messiah the O.T. Christians believed in.
Jesus does not advocate the idea that you can be saved by "striving to keep the Law" (that would be a flat-out contradiction to ROMANS 3:20). Jesus never mentioned this to NICODEMUS, who was also a Jew, but talked about GRACE. Christ was therefore using the Law to that PROUD RICH MAN, to break his pride in himself and show that he HADN'T kept it - He was using it as a MIRROR or a SCHOOLMASTER so he could be justified BY FAITH.
/// Romans 10 repeatedly mentions the righteousness which is of the law ///
Yes...and "that the person who does the commandments (to perfection in thought, word and deed) shall live by them." - But from Genesis to Revelation the continual resounding cry of Scripture is this.... "THERE IS NOT A RIGHTEOUS MAN ON EARTH WHO DOES GOOD AND NEVER SINS" (Eccles 7:20)
and also this...
"NO ONE LIVING IS RIGHTEOUS BEFORE YOU" (Psalm 143:2)
And I told you, that verse is NOTHING to do with "earning salvation by doing good works".
That verse is about the DAILY WALK of the one who is ALREADY IN COVENANT RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD (i.e. "already saved" by faith alone in the coming Messiah).
Its about PRACTICAL righteousness, not SOTERIOLOGICAL (saving) righteousness.
Romans 3:20 - "by works of the Law, NO MAN WILL BE JUSTIFIED IN HIS SIGHT"
Continued: Ezekiel 3:20 is not hypothetical. It says when, not if. You're calling God a liar. Of course nobody could go without sinning, but that's why part of the law was if you sin, bring a sacrifice to atone for it. You can throw Pauline verses at me all day. It only proves my point.
Sure Abraham obeyed God's voice and his commandments, but he lived before the dispensation of law (John 1:17, Gal 3:17) when that was the means of salvation according to Jesus Christ (Matthew 19:17).
/// part of the law was if you sin, bring a sacrifice to atone for it ///
Yes the SACRIFICAL Law showed that, but MERE "OBEDIENCE" to that Law itself is not what does the justifying! (remember, ROMANS 3:20 say "BY WORKS OF THE LAW, NO MAN WILL BE JUSTIFIED IN HIS SIGHT"...
The RETROSPECTIVE WORK OF THE CROSS OF CHRIST is what does the atoning - because HEB.10:1-3 states that "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats [in and of themselves] to take away sins."
/// when that was the means of salvation according to Jesus Christ (Matthew 19:17) ///
NOT AT ALL!
Jesus was using the Law in it proper purpose....as an evangelistical MIRROR to show the proud Rich Man that he had dirt on his face afterall and wasnt as clean as he thought.
Paul himself said "IF IT WASN'T FOR THE LAW, I WOULDNT HAVE KNOWN WHAT SIN WAS" (Romans7:7)
and
"BY THE LAW COMES THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN" (Rom.3:20)
Continued: Read the verse, man. It says nobody knew it or they wouldn't have crucified Jesus. You're going through an awful lot of trouble to make all these verses say what they don't say and ignore what they do say. And to say that Jesus' only purpose in coming was to die is another instance of making Jesus a liar. He came to offer the kingdom to the Jews (ethnic Israel, if you will; Matthew 10:5,11:11-14), and they rejected it.
/// He came to offer the kingdom to the Jews (ethnic Israel, if you will; Matthew 10:5,11:11-14) ///
Matt.10:5 has NOTHING to do with setting up an ethnic/political kingdom - funnily enough it mentions the LOST SHEEP (aka, the elect) of Israel - not ethnic Israel.
C.f with JOHN 10:26 shows that not all of ethnic Israel was of Christ's "SHEEP".
This section is talking about the SACRIFICIAL SYSTEM that removed sins ONLY BECAUSE the work of the Cross was retrospectively SHINING through them doing the real atoning work.
Verse 3 is talking about ETHNIC Israelites DECEIVED BY THE PHARISEES - not the true elect believers in the O.T.
Verse 4 is about the GOAL/TARGET/AIM/ of the Law....CHRIST - and the only righteousness that HE gives, through faith alone in Him. The Law was the SCHOOLMASTER to lead us to Christ, from Genesis to Revelation.
Verse 5 talks about those SHOWN TO BE RIGHTEOUS if they hadnt broken the Law in one place - of which noone is able to!!!
This is not addressed to ALIEN sinners, but only to those who are ALREADY in a covenant relationship with God - aka, those who were ALREADY of the elect/saved.
This is talking about PRACTICAL righteousness in the DAILY WALK - aka, telling us what is acceptable to God - NOT something to attempt to gain SALVATION or ACCEPTANCE - Romans 3:20 applies to THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE (O.T. and N.T.)
In that case, for 1500 years, not a single Israelite had been saved - Had salvation been obtainable by HUMAN EFFORT, there had been no need for God to send His Son here!
ROMANS 3:20 says that NOONE is justified by works of the Law, since through the Law comes the KNOWLEDGE OF SIN.
Salvation has NEVER been procurable by human effort/merits! (Gen.4:4, Heb.11:4, Rom.4, Lev.17:11, Ps.130:3, Ps.71:16)
This is a "hypothetical" situation - Ezekiel would have known VERY well that the Scriptures make it clear that "THERE IS NOT A RIGHTEOUS MAN ON EARTH WHO DOES GOOD AND NEVER SINS"
/// Abraham is a terrible example to refute that because he lived before the law. ///
Oh really???
GENESIS 26:5 says... "Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My COMMANDMENTS, My STATUTES, and My LAWS."
So there WERE laws given by God before Moses and Abraham.
/// 1 Corinthians 2:7-8 ///
This is talking about God blinding peoples eyes, making way for and setting in motion, Christ's real ONE AND ONLY purpose of coming to earth - aka, to DIE FOR SIN.
Thirdly, some of the older versions of the Scriptures refer to Israel as "the CHURCH in the wilderness" - ACTS 7:38
Fifthly, bear in mind that SPIRITUAL Israel ("elect" Israel) is the TRUE Israel/Church of God - not NATIONAL Israel as a whole, as dispensationalism teaches - read ROMANS 9:6-8, and 11:1-7 (notice it shows that "the elect" are the true Israel).
Sixthly, Christ said there will be ONE flock, (not TWO, as disp teaches) - JOHN 10:16.
Oh boy, another church in a different dispensation. Did you ever notice that the passage goes on to mention the sins of those people? Did you ever notice that no Old Testament saint's sins are ever recounted in the scriptures after the death of Christ because their sins have been taken away?
Nice try. Romans 9 is still talking about physical Jews. It's the children of promise counted for the seed (Christ). Ditto 11. Reinforces Rom 2:29. That doesn't make a saved Gentile a Jew.
/// Nice try. Romans 9 is still talking about physical Jews ///
Irrelevant. There is nothing spectacular about the "physical" descent from Abraham. ROMANS 9:7-8 clearly states that.
The Religious Leaders said to Christ "WE ARE OFFSPRING OF ABRAHAM!" (John8:33), but Christ basically said "NO YOU AREN'T. The real 'offspring' of Abraham are SPIRITUAL offspring - the Children of PROMISE (those who are the ELECT" in Christ - GALATIANS 3:29) not of THE FLESH"
Seventhly, GALATIANS 6:16 refers to the entire Church/election of grace as "THE ISRAEL of God".
Eighthly, GALATIANS 3:28-29 shows us that there is no "Israel AND the Church", but that "there is neither JEW, nor Greek...for you are all ONE, and if you are Christ's, then YOU (the Church) are Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise."
Remember only the CHILDREN OF PROMISE are the real Israel - not the children of the FLESH (Romans 9:6-8)
That's not what Galatians 6:16 says, you liar. The Israel of God is a separate group of people. Read it again.
Keep reading. We're heirs through Christ. We're his bride, remember? That doesn't count out the physical Jews.
If Israel=the church, then they should be interchangeable all through Paul's letters. That makes Romans 11:25-28 look awful stupid. Is blindness happened to the church? Is the church the enemy of the gospel? If you're an Israelite, which tribe are you from (11:1)?
/// If Israel=the church, they should be interchangeable all through Paul's letters ///
I noticed you mentioned Paul alone (typical of dispensationists). There are FIVE other Apostles, whose writings, like Pauls, ALSO refer specifically to US today - Peter, James, Jude, John and the writer of Hebrews.
Peter interchanges in 1PET.1:1 calling us the "ELECT EXILES OF THE DISPERSION"
James calls the Church "THE TWELVE TRIBES in the Dispersion"
/// That makes Romans 11:25-28 look awful stupid. Is blindness happened to the church? ///
Again, knowing the distintion between ETHNIC Israel, and SPIRITUAL (elect) Israel comes into play here.
This particular verse is talking about ETHNIC Israel - not the Church (which is SPIRITUAL elect Israel) - look at 11:7..."THE ELECT obtained it, but the rest were hardened"
Irrelevant - Paul is here talking about the fact that God hasnt abandoned everyone who is outwardly called an "Israelite", by proving that he himself is a Jew - and showing that there are still some of the elect among the nation of Israel, preventing ideas of ANTI-SEMITISM (or replacement theology)
BTW, REPLACEMENT Theology is totally different to COVENANT Theology.
To this I agree. Why did you even start this fight? You must have gotten your idea of what dispensationalism is from somebody who had no idea what it is. The point is that the rules God holds men to change at different times (look up dispensation in a dictionary), and those differences have to be recognized to rightly divide the word of truth. See my other comment about salvation under the law involving works.
@ChristianTruthHammer And the Kingdom is here and now, though it won't be fully manifest until Jesus comes for the 2nd time luke 17:21
About those two scriptures you stated I am confused about the point that you are trying to make with Matthew 19, those are things that every follower of Christ should do because if "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. 24He who does not love me will not obey my teaching.
@ChristianTruthHammer With your quote from Acts I still don't follow you, If you believe in the Lord, you will be saved and that belief will help you love Christ and follow his commands, it is not 2 seperate gospels, we are not saved by works, but we do works because we are saved. read the Book of James. No offense but in the words of Deitrich Bonhoeffer, those who think they don't have to follow Christ's commands and still be saved are utilizing cheap grace
@ChristianTruthHammer I think Christians with that theology fall into the same trap as the Pharisees believing that they were saved because they "were children of Abraham" remember that at the judgement day people will say " 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
May the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Dispensationalism is most definitely a modern heresy that was concocted in the early 1800's. When I was young my family became involved with a small independent Baptist Church, and dispensationalism was their main theology. I had sensed there was something drastically wrong with what I was being taught. As an adult, like you, I can now clearly see the truth taught by the Bible and our early Church Fathers.
my "Jesus of Nazareth Public Healthcare" vid you liked & video responded to was attacked by Tea Party "Patriots", Conservative Pharisees & lawless Dispensational "Christians".
they fraudulently flagged it till it got removed. see what they do? i'd not ever nor would most Liberals ever do that to Conservative vids merely because we disagree?! evil & undemocratic. better to just argue at their vid, on the merits. LOL
my gf, Lys has a copy & dozens of our friends too & it already went viral. ^_^
btw your beliefs are in line with Liberal Christians. you may not want to hear that. but it's true.
it doesn't mean you're a "Socialist" or seduced by Secularism. don't listen to uneducated delusional talk of "Socialism", "evil govt tryanny" & "community organizers", etc.
Christ was a community organizer. church volunteers are community organizers.
keep a pure perspective. ignore hate & ignorance of Tea Party "Patriots" who spit upon those concerned for the rights & needs of the Poor & the Sick.
@IrishShannonTomato That is true, I can be quite liberal when it comes to economic policy and the like, the problem is some liberal christians and I differ on theology. I believe in the Virgin Birth as well as a bodily reserection, But to combat the liberal theology fundamentalism was born in the 1920s and it focused almost entirely on post-calvary and nothing on his ethical teachings.
Thats why I like to say I am a moderate theologicaly
not all Liberal Christians deny Virgin birth, bodily resurrection & other faith dependent miracles. partly because lots of what Liberal political perspective believes on defending the rights of Working Class Poor & the Sick is sometimes very emotional & faith dependent as well. LOL
not all Liberal Christians are advocates of "Liberal Theology". don't get Liberal political confused with "Liberal Theology". they don't go together & at least half of Liberals reject Liberal theology.
@IrishShannonTomato And that I think is one of the lies of the religious right they equate the 2 together. I am mostly politicaly liberal, moderate theological, and social conservative, although on some of the major social issues like Abortion and homosexuality I am more right of center then far right.
Abortion is neither Left or Right. it's life & well being of humanity that should not be measured by Left or Right. your view is not wrong as long as you're completely pro-Life, Pro-all Life, not just before birth but after birth & all through life till end of life.
on homosexuality, like all sexuality is only wrong if the intention is purely lust without mature devoted love. if not with selfish purely lustful exploitative intent.
if you're perplexed by my mention of Djinnis and their Biblical existence and reliability or truth, read of King Solomon. he was given authority by God to command Djinni & demons. Djinnis both good ones who freely promised eternal loyalty to God & evil Djinnis loyal only to their own neutral selfish desires. he commanded both good & bad Djinnis to build the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. that Temple was essentially built by Djinnis. sounds funny & not Bibilical? look it up. ^_^
if you're perplexed by my mention of Djinnis and their Biblical existence and reliability or truth, read of King Solomon. he was given authority by God to command Djinni & demons. Djinnis both good ones who freely promised eternal loyalty to God & evil Djinnis loyal only to their own neutral selfish desires. he commanded both good & bad Djinnis to build the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. that Temple was essentially built by Djinnis. sounds funny & not Bibilical? look it up. ^_^
@IrishShannonTomato end times theology is important some liberal Christians can go their whole lives without reading Revelation but you can't be blinded by it so you don't do the good work that our Lord and Master commands us to do, helping the poor and the sick and preaching the Good News.
another lie of the religious Right is that Sodom & Gomorrah was sinful enough to be destroyed because of sexual promiscuity. that is wrong. it did have sinful sexual promiscuity. but that wasnt the straw that broke the camel's back for God.
Sodom & Gomorrah did have sinful sexual promiscuity. but that wasnt the straw that broke the camel's back for God.
if you read the Scriptures, the last straw for God that angered him enough to destroy it was, "they lived with such careless ease and ignorance that they ignored the cries of the Poor and the Sick." hmm? LOL. tell your religious Right friends to put some thought behind that little quandary. LOL. ^_^
@IrishShannonTomato Ezekiel 16 But you did ackologe that sexual promiscuity was part of it. Check out my latest video it's my interpretation of revelation and the end of the age
you didnt try to answer why God sent two Archangels accompanied by their lesser servants, Djinni earth angels to kill & destroy, instead of sending Angels of Death like the Plagues of Egypt. ; j
even the sexual promiscuity sinful behavior, God didnt consider homosexuality the offense. do you know what the two sexual offenses were by Sodom & Gomorrah that really offended God?
exploitation of innocents, seducing (and rape) of young children & the other was rape (of men & women)
and who did the Lord send to destroy Sodom & Gomorrah for wealthier people ignoring cries of the Poor and the Sick?
he didnt send Angels of Death but two Archangels to kill & destroy. why not send a wave of hovering Angels of Death like the Plagues? that's significant. can you tell why? ^_^
in Arabic/Persian version Archangels accompanied by genies (djinnis)
btw read my new profile. i'm part Persian & have an ancient Persian prayer in it. consider it a prayer to inspire you. ^_^
We are saved by grace through faith resulting in obedience to Jesus Christ. We have a new covenant because Jesus fulfilled the old covenant with the Israelis showing that He is the Messiah (the Christ). The Old Covenant was the blueprint, but Jesus Christ is the reality. If you are saved, you want to obey Christ. By their fruits will you know them. Just because someone is well known does not mean they are right.
@gloryboundkev AMEN I want to obey Him, sometimes I don't out of fear,shame, pride, laziness, or selfishness but THe more I pray and the more I abide in Him the more I am able to follow Him and serve Him.
We lookl through a glass darkley and we won't be perfect until He comes again but he does give us the strenght to be better day by day
@AVoiceCrying33 I see you mentioned you "want" to obey. Our belief is unto belief, not in working our way in by the law. Christ came to fulfill the law, and met the righteous requirements of the law. He provided for us, what we were unable to do before under the law....to keep it! We stand before the presence of our maker, free of sin and accusation at all times! We keep the Covenant! Yes, we do!
My understanding is much different than most. So, please don't be offended. But the fulfillment of time was 2000 years ago, and the prince of darkness was cast out then. I am no longer under the curse of accusation. Christ came to fulfill the law, in order to set us free from our sin. I simply do not believe were sinners any longer in Christ. Or its dead, buried in Christ baptism. Repentance has an end...
jungian9111: If by fulfillment of time you mean full Preterism, we part ways (Im orthodox Preterist). Otherwise, more hold your view than you suppose. I hold that Christs death was the ultimate exorcism (as you say, cast out). And I think that Voice Crying would likely agree because it is Biblical.
@KeeperOfTheWord What is the difference between full Preterism and orthodox Preterism?
I believe that all 4 views of Revelation have merit from a biblical standpoint. i am a mixture of Historicist and futerist but I don't think anybody really knows and if they claim they know with a certainty, I do not trust them. I made a theory in a new video. I don't know if it's right or not, but it could be.
VC: Full Preterism: Mt 24 & 25 was fulfilled in 70 AD. Orthodox Preterism: Mt 24:1-35 fulfilled in 70 AD, Mt 26:36-25:46 is still future. All 4 systems are somewhat Biblical; I hold mostly to the Ideal interpretation. Progressive Dispensationalism is (thankfully) much closer to Covenant Theology: Christ is now on Davids throne in Glory, allowing some fulfillment of OT prophecies. In PD, NT can reinterpret the OT and is more affirming of OT/NT unity. Some regard PD as Classic Pre-mill variant.
@KeeperOfTheWord I keep the Covenant and the conditions of it! I walk with my maker on holy ground!
For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
And that he might reconcile both into God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby; Ephesians 2
@jungian9111 Yeah I have to disagree with that because of 1 John 8If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives. We are still sinners but we are sinners saved by Grace and he makes us less and less but we will still sin
@AVoiceCrying33 Yes, I know the verse you are referring to well. The next verse is..
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from (all) unrighteousness.
Who has own self bare our sins in his own body on a tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed! 1 Peter 2:24 I feel no sin...period!
Usually reserved for damning error, heresy may overstate the case; but as I see it, Dispensational theology has very serious problems. It has a strong, Gnostic benty. DT is seriously divided. Progressive Dispensationalism is much closer to a covenant view of Scripture. Chafer is old school. I often say that we push kingdom into the future to avoid the persecutions Revelation describes, that will surely follow a truly kingdom-incarnational faith. Blessings!
@KeeperOfTheWord Heresy might of been a tad much I will agree, I am kmind of confused about progressive dispensationalism. I haven't heard of that term before.
They get the future kingdom from Revelation 20 I believe and I do believe in a future total Kingdom but I also do believe that we have to live a kingdom-incarnational faith here and now
Be nice to them (Dispensationalist) say they are in error, they just do not realize it.
NewDay867 1 month ago
@NewDay867 I know I love them, I just don't like the damage that they do. God Bless you.
AVoiceCrying33 1 month ago
@AVoiceCrying33 They very much pro war for the sake of Israel.
NewDay867 1 month ago
@NewDay867 I know, they are willing to support evil to bring back Jesus sooner, but Jesus will come back on his timetable and not ours.
AVoiceCrying33 3 weeks ago
Easter? You know that is a pagan holiday and a heresy too, right?
FAITHandLOGIC 9 months ago
@FAITHandLOGIC The early church co-opted early pagan holidays to help bring pagans to Christ. Christians who celebrate Easter do not worship a pagan God but the risin Christ who died for us at Golgatha and was ressurected on the third day. On Christmas we are not worshiping Mithras but the fact that God so loved us he became human and Emmanuel God is with us.
God knows what is in our hearts and knows that even if they started as pagan holidays, now it is all about Jesus
AVoiceCrying33 8 months ago
@ramonaluiza Thank you and God Bless you
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
Hello, sir. I found this looking for opposing viewpoints to critically examine my own position. While I agree with much of what you've said here, including the exhortation to live righteously, I don't think you fully understand what you're criticizing. When I first heard the idea of different gospels in the tribulation, OT, NT, and millenium I thought it was insane, but it's absolutely true. See Matt. 19:16-17 & Acts 16:30-31. Those are two completely different responses. How do you explain it?
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer I think my main problem with dispensationilism is because #1 it makes Jesus out to be a false apocalyptic prophet if in Matthew 24 during the Olivet Discourse up through Matthew 24:35 is concerning the fall of Jerouselem in 70 AD
My 2nd problem like I said is that not all but most dispensationilists seem to not think that Jesus' commands apply to them and that frightens me. The Sermon on the Mount is Jesus' manifesto, how those who belong to the Kingdom shouldm be
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
I shall reply by PM so nothing gets lost in comment trees.
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
Dispensationalism is refuted by the simple fact that The Church IS Israel, and Israel IS the Church.
You wanna debate?
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
"Dispensationalism is refuted by the simple fact that The Church IS Israel, and Israel IS the Church."
Chapter and verse?
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
Firstly, the Old Testament saints believed in the Messiah and that He would take away their transgressions by His death (ISAIAH 53) - and EPHESIANS 5:25 says "Christ loved THE CHURCH and gave Himself FOR HER" - not "the Church AND ISRAEL".
Secondly, EPH.1:22-23 state that "THE CHURCH" is the BODY of Christ. And EPH.3:6 says "the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of THE SAME BODY".
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
Right, that's why his disciples were so supportive when he said he had to die (Matthew 16:21-22). Oh wait...
That's not what Eph 1:22-23 says, but the concept is granted. Gal 2:20 says Christ gave himself for Paul, not Paul and everybody who would ever believe on him. I guess that puts us in a rotten mess!
Yes, Gentiles are also of the same body: the body of Christ, which is the church. But the church is not Israel. When a Jew gets saved he is no longer a Jew, he's a Christian.
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// that's why his disciples/jews were so supportive when he said he had to die Matthew 16:21-22///
You're forgetting... God, AT THAT TIME, had purposefully "blinded" them from seeing what the Scriptures said (see LUKE 9:45 - "But they (the apostles) did not understand this saying, and IT WAS CONCEALED FROM THEM, SO THAT THEY MIGHT NOT PERCEIVE IT").
God blinded men's hearts so that they carry out His ONE AND ONLY REASON for coming - to DIE FOR SIN (John 12:27, 18:37)
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// That's not what Eph 1:22-23 says, but the concept is granted ///
Eph.1:22-23 is the truth IN ITS ENTIRETY - not PART of it as you assert.
The same goes for Eph.5:25...
Christ only has ONE body (Eph.4:4,2:16), and that is THE Church - Eph.1:22-23, 2:16, 1Cor.12:13,27
The Church = Christ's "WHOLE" body - (Eph.4:16)
THE body = THE Church (Col.1:18,24)
OT Christians and NT Christians are fellow heirs and MEMBERS OF THE "SAME" BODY - Eph.3:6
Beat that.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// the church is not Israel. ///
Let me clarify... There are TWO "Israels" mentioned in Scripture...
Romans 9:6-8, 2:28 and 11:1-7 clearly tell us that only the ELECT human beings "OUT OF" the ethnic 'nation' of Israel are part of the true people of God - i.e. SPIRITUAL Israel.
The rest, (i.e. the REPROBATE "OUT OF" the ethnic 'nation' of Israel have absolutely no part with the TRUE people of God.
SPIRITUAL Israel = The Church, which is the body of the ELECT.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// When a Jew gets saved he is no longer a Jew, he's a Christian. ///
TRUE Old Testament Jews WERE Christians - The only difference was that they had FORWARD POINTING saving-faith in the coming Messiah, by GRACE, THROUGH faith IN the one and only Mediator. Jesus said "Abraham saw My day, AND WAS GLAD" (John 8:56).
All of God's people are ONE and are MEMBERS OF THE SAME BODY, the Church.
The Church is defined as "The Body of Christ's Elect - OT & NT"
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
"The only difference was that they had FORWARD POINTING saving-faith in the coming Messiah"
That contradicts so many clear scriptures indicating OT salvation under the law was by faith and works, including but not limited to Matthew 19:16-17 (cf. Heb 9:13-17, Acts 16:30-31), Romans 10:1-5 cf. Deuteronomy 6:25, and Ezekiel 3:20, 18:21-28. Abraham is a terrible example to refute that because he lived before the law. See also 1 Corinthians 2:7-8.
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// salvation under the law was by faith and works ///
This is where Dispensationalism tells lies. At NO point in history was a man justified by faith AND WORKS - show me one person in the BIble who was.
EPHESIANS 2:8-9 - "by GRACE, through FAITH, in CHRIST alone"
HABAKKUK 2:4 says "The righteous shall live by his FAITH (alone)"
ROMANS 4 - Abraham was justified by FAITH (alone).
HEBREWS 11 - many O.T. Christians are justified by their FAITH.
Disp is heresy.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
Hebrews 11 doesn't say anything about justification.
You're making Jesus a liar in Matthew 19.
The significance of Hebrews 9 there is that the New Testament and the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ was not in effect until Christ died. Read it. I pointed to Acts 16 because that's after the cross. Different answer to the same question as Matthew 19. Romans 10 repeatedly mentions the righteousness which is of the law: works. Hence Deuteronomy 6:25.
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Hebrews 11 doesn't say about justification. ///
Heb 11:4, "By faith, Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, THROUGH WHICH HE WAS COMMENDED AS RIGHTEOUS"
Heb 11:7, "By faith, Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear, constructed an ark... By this he condemned the world AND BECAME AN HEIR OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS THAT COMES BY FAITH."
Heb 11:39, "And all these...COMMENDED (justified) THROUGH THEIR FAITH"
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// You're making Jesus a liar in Matthew 19 ///
Nope. I'm going along with ROMANS 3:20 - "FOR BY WORKS OF THE LAW, NO HUMAN BEING WILL BE JUSTIFIED...SINCE THROUGH THE LAW COMES THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN"
You are the one twisting the Lord's words. Scripture does not contradict itself.
Psalm 143:2 says "...FOR NO ONE LIVING IS RIGHTEOUS BEFORE YOU"
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// the death, burial, and resurrection was not in effect until Christ died. ///
Oh yes it was!
It was in effect RETROSPECTIVELY, shining its effectual ATONING work through the O.T. animal sacrifices - read for yourself...
LEV.4:35 "And the priest shall make ATONEMENT for him for the sin which he has committed, and HE SHALL BE FORGIVEN.
LEV.10:17 "that you may bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make ATONEMENT for them before the LORD?
Also - LEV16:30
doctorh2005 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Acts 16 because that's after the cross ///
Irrelevant. The O.T. Christians had a FORWARD believing saving faith in the exact same COMING Messiah.
Now that the Messiah has come, we no longer need that FORWARD believe, but we now look BACKWARDS to the very same Messiah the O.T. Christians believed in.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Different answer to Matthew 19 ///
Jesus does not advocate the idea that you can be saved by "striving to keep the Law" (that would be a flat-out contradiction to ROMANS 3:20). Jesus never mentioned this to NICODEMUS, who was also a Jew, but talked about GRACE. Christ was therefore using the Law to that PROUD RICH MAN, to break his pride in himself and show that he HADN'T kept it - He was using it as a MIRROR or a SCHOOLMASTER so he could be justified BY FAITH.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Romans 10 repeatedly mentions the righteousness which is of the law ///
Yes...and "that the person who does the commandments (to perfection in thought, word and deed) shall live by them." - But from Genesis to Revelation the continual resounding cry of Scripture is this.... "THERE IS NOT A RIGHTEOUS MAN ON EARTH WHO DOES GOOD AND NEVER SINS" (Eccles 7:20)
and also this...
"NO ONE LIVING IS RIGHTEOUS BEFORE YOU" (Psalm 143:2)
and also 1KINGS 8:46.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Hence Deuteronomy 6:25 ///
And I told you, that verse is NOTHING to do with "earning salvation by doing good works".
That verse is about the DAILY WALK of the one who is ALREADY IN COVENANT RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD (i.e. "already saved" by faith alone in the coming Messiah).
Its about PRACTICAL righteousness, not SOTERIOLOGICAL (saving) righteousness.
Romans 3:20 - "by works of the Law, NO MAN WILL BE JUSTIFIED IN HIS SIGHT"
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
Continued: Ezekiel 3:20 is not hypothetical. It says when, not if. You're calling God a liar. Of course nobody could go without sinning, but that's why part of the law was if you sin, bring a sacrifice to atone for it. You can throw Pauline verses at me all day. It only proves my point.
Sure Abraham obeyed God's voice and his commandments, but he lived before the dispensation of law (John 1:17, Gal 3:17) when that was the means of salvation according to Jesus Christ (Matthew 19:17).
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Ezekiel 3:20 is not hypothetical. It says when, not if. ///
FIRSTLY:
Yes, "When the righteous man [if there ever WAS a righteous man - because Ecclesiastes 7:20 says, "THERE IS NOT A RIGHTEOUS MAN ON EARTH".
Psalm 143:2 says "for NO ONE is righteous before You"]
Romans 3:10 says "NOONE is righteous, NO, NOT ONE"
The ESV says "IF" - so it IS hypotheitcal.
Look on Esword and tell me the word for "when" in that passage.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// You're calling God a liar ///
THIRDLY
Find me, on Esword, the HEBREW WORD for "WHEN" sepcifically in Ezekiel 3:20..... I bet you can't find it!
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// part of the law was if you sin, bring a sacrifice to atone for it ///
Yes the SACRIFICAL Law showed that, but MERE "OBEDIENCE" to that Law itself is not what does the justifying! (remember, ROMANS 3:20 say "BY WORKS OF THE LAW, NO MAN WILL BE JUSTIFIED IN HIS SIGHT"...
The RETROSPECTIVE WORK OF THE CROSS OF CHRIST is what does the atoning - because HEB.10:1-3 states that "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats [in and of themselves] to take away sins."
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Abraham obeyed God's voice but he lived before the dispensation of law ///
NOWHERE in human history was there ever a time when salvation was obtainable by trying/striving to keep the LAW - NOT ONE.
Romans 3:20 is talking about the ENTIRE HUMAN RACE - "By works of the Law NO MAN shall be justified in His sight".
/// John 1:17, Gal 3:17 //
Mentions nothing about a "dispensation"
The Law was and is the schoolmaster to lead us to faith in Christ (O.T. and N.T)
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// when that was the means of salvation according to Jesus Christ (Matthew 19:17) ///
NOT AT ALL!
Jesus was using the Law in it proper purpose....as an evangelistical MIRROR to show the proud Rich Man that he had dirt on his face afterall and wasnt as clean as he thought.
Paul himself said "IF IT WASN'T FOR THE LAW, I WOULDNT HAVE KNOWN WHAT SIN WAS" (Romans7:7)
and
"BY THE LAW COMES THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN" (Rom.3:20)
You can't know what sin is without the Law.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
Continued: Read the verse, man. It says nobody knew it or they wouldn't have crucified Jesus. You're going through an awful lot of trouble to make all these verses say what they don't say and ignore what they do say. And to say that Jesus' only purpose in coming was to die is another instance of making Jesus a liar. He came to offer the kingdom to the Jews (ethnic Israel, if you will; Matthew 10:5,11:11-14), and they rejected it.
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// to say that Jesus' only purpose in coming was to die is another instance of making Jesus a liar ///
The one thing that really kills that idiotic idea that Christ was originall planning to set up an ETHNIC POLITICAL Kingdom is JOHN 6:15...
"Perceiving then that they were about to come and...MAKE HIM KING...Jesus withdrew again to the mountain by Himself"
It clearly WASN'T His plan to do so! - also read John18:36, 12:27, Luke 24:25-27, Matt.20:28, Acts2:23...
doctorh2005 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// He came to offer the kingdom to the Jews (ethnic Israel, if you will; Matthew 10:5,11:11-14) ///
Matt.10:5 has NOTHING to do with setting up an ethnic/political kingdom - funnily enough it mentions the LOST SHEEP (aka, the elect) of Israel - not ethnic Israel.
C.f with JOHN 10:26 shows that not all of ethnic Israel was of Christ's "SHEEP".
11:11-14
Christ's Kingdom is SPIRITUAL - not terrestrial/political/ethnical - read JOHN 18:36 and Matt.25:34, Heb.11:16
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Matthew 19:16-17 ///
Jesus is here using the Law EVANGELISTICALLY - to show the rich man that he HADN'T kept the Law to its perfect standard.
Jesus is NOT telling us that you can "earn salvation" by the Law - because NOONE can keep it.
/// cf. Heb 9:13-17 ///
This section is talking about the SACRIFICIAL SYSTEM that removed sins ONLY BECAUSE the work of the Cross was retrospectively SHINING through them doing the real atoning work.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Acts 16:30-31 ///
This section is actually IN FAVOUR of what I previously said - through faith alone in the Messiah, who was revealed to be Jesus Christ.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Romans 10:1-5 ///
Verse 3 is talking about ETHNIC Israelites DECEIVED BY THE PHARISEES - not the true elect believers in the O.T.
Verse 4 is about the GOAL/TARGET/AIM/ of the Law....CHRIST - and the only righteousness that HE gives, through faith alone in Him. The Law was the SCHOOLMASTER to lead us to Christ, from Genesis to Revelation.
Verse 5 talks about those SHOWN TO BE RIGHTEOUS if they hadnt broken the Law in one place - of which noone is able to!!!
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Deuteronomy 6:25 ///
Taken from John Calvin
This is not addressed to ALIEN sinners, but only to those who are ALREADY in a covenant relationship with God - aka, those who were ALREADY of the elect/saved.
This is talking about PRACTICAL righteousness in the DAILY WALK - aka, telling us what is acceptable to God - NOT something to attempt to gain SALVATION or ACCEPTANCE - Romans 3:20 applies to THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE (O.T. and N.T.)
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
CONTINUED.... (about Deut.6:25)
In that case, for 1500 years, not a single Israelite had been saved - Had salvation been obtainable by HUMAN EFFORT, there had been no need for God to send His Son here!
ROMANS 3:20 says that NOONE is justified by works of the Law, since through the Law comes the KNOWLEDGE OF SIN.
Salvation has NEVER been procurable by human effort/merits! (Gen.4:4, Heb.11:4, Rom.4, Lev.17:11, Ps.130:3, Ps.71:16)
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Ezekiel 3:20, 18:21-28 ///
This is a "hypothetical" situation - Ezekiel would have known VERY well that the Scriptures make it clear that "THERE IS NOT A RIGHTEOUS MAN ON EARTH WHO DOES GOOD AND NEVER SINS"
(PSALM 143:2 / 1KINGS 8:46 / ECCLES.7:20 / JOB 15:14)
And as Paul says...
"NOONE IS RIGHTEOUS, NO NOT ONE" (Romans 3:10)
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Abraham is a terrible example to refute that because he lived before the law. ///
Oh really???
GENESIS 26:5 says... "Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My COMMANDMENTS, My STATUTES, and My LAWS."
So there WERE laws given by God before Moses and Abraham.
/// 1 Corinthians 2:7-8 ///
This is talking about God blinding peoples eyes, making way for and setting in motion, Christ's real ONE AND ONLY purpose of coming to earth - aka, to DIE FOR SIN.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
Thirdly, some of the older versions of the Scriptures refer to Israel as "the CHURCH in the wilderness" - ACTS 7:38
Fifthly, bear in mind that SPIRITUAL Israel ("elect" Israel) is the TRUE Israel/Church of God - not NATIONAL Israel as a whole, as dispensationalism teaches - read ROMANS 9:6-8, and 11:1-7 (notice it shows that "the elect" are the true Israel).
Sixthly, Christ said there will be ONE flock, (not TWO, as disp teaches) - JOHN 10:16.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
Oh boy, another church in a different dispensation. Did you ever notice that the passage goes on to mention the sins of those people? Did you ever notice that no Old Testament saint's sins are ever recounted in the scriptures after the death of Christ because their sins have been taken away?
Nice try. Romans 9 is still talking about physical Jews. It's the children of promise counted for the seed (Christ). Ditto 11. Reinforces Rom 2:29. That doesn't make a saved Gentile a Jew.
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Oh boy, another church in a different dispensation ///
From Genesis to Revelation, there is only ONE people of God - ONE Church - "the Body of Christ's chosen, predestined ELECT".
That is why ACTS 7:38 says "THE" Church in the wilderness. :-)
/// the passage goes on to mention the sins of those people ///
This is where the distinction between TRUE Israel and FALSE Israel comes in.
TRUE (elect) Israel are the people of God, the NON-elect/reprobate ARENT.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// Nice try. Romans 9 is still talking about physical Jews ///
Irrelevant. There is nothing spectacular about the "physical" descent from Abraham. ROMANS 9:7-8 clearly states that.
The Religious Leaders said to Christ "WE ARE OFFSPRING OF ABRAHAM!" (John8:33), but Christ basically said "NO YOU AREN'T. The real 'offspring' of Abraham are SPIRITUAL offspring - the Children of PROMISE (those who are the ELECT" in Christ - GALATIANS 3:29) not of THE FLESH"
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// It's the children of promise counted for the seed (Christ). ///
Galatians 3:29 says THE CHURCH (aka "the body of elect Gentiles and elect Jews") is "the seed of Abraham".
Yes - the ELECT only, not the reprobate.
Christ died for the Elect only.
/// Reinforces Rom 2:29. That doesn't make a saved Gentile a Jew. ///
Romans 2:29 tells us that Christians are SPIRITUAL Jews.
Elect O.T. Jews are CHRISTIANS (not all who call themselves Jews are of the Elect).
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
Seventhly, GALATIANS 6:16 refers to the entire Church/election of grace as "THE ISRAEL of God".
Eighthly, GALATIANS 3:28-29 shows us that there is no "Israel AND the Church", but that "there is neither JEW, nor Greek...for you are all ONE, and if you are Christ's, then YOU (the Church) are Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise."
Remember only the CHILDREN OF PROMISE are the real Israel - not the children of the FLESH (Romans 9:6-8)
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
That's not what Galatians 6:16 says, you liar. The Israel of God is a separate group of people. Read it again.
Keep reading. We're heirs through Christ. We're his bride, remember? That doesn't count out the physical Jews.
If Israel=the church, then they should be interchangeable all through Paul's letters. That makes Romans 11:25-28 look awful stupid. Is blindness happened to the church? Is the church the enemy of the gospel? If you're an Israelite, which tribe are you from (11:1)?
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// The Israel of God is a separate group of people. ///
No its not. SPIRITUAL Israelites (the elect "out of" the nation of Israel) are members of the Body of Christ, THE CHURCH.
The "Israel of God" is the spiritual name given to THE ENTIRE ELECTION OF GRACE from the Genesis to Revelation.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// We're heirs through Christ. We're his bride, remember? That doesn't count out the physical Jews ///
No, we are FELLOW heirs, and members of THE VERY SAME BODY (read Ephesians 3:6)
And Eph.1:22-23 says "THE" BODY of Christ IS the CHURCH".
The Church is "the body of Christ's Elect (OT and NT saints all together)"
Concerning "physical" Jews, there is no difference between them and "physical" Germans, "physical" Australians, "Physical"....etc.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// If Israel=the church, they should be interchangeable all through Paul's letters ///
I noticed you mentioned Paul alone (typical of dispensationists). There are FIVE other Apostles, whose writings, like Pauls, ALSO refer specifically to US today - Peter, James, Jude, John and the writer of Hebrews.
Peter interchanges in 1PET.1:1 calling us the "ELECT EXILES OF THE DISPERSION"
James calls the Church "THE TWELVE TRIBES in the Dispersion"
C.f with JUDE 17-18.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// That makes Romans 11:25-28 look awful stupid. Is blindness happened to the church? ///
Again, knowing the distintion between ETHNIC Israel, and SPIRITUAL (elect) Israel comes into play here.
This particular verse is talking about ETHNIC Israel - not the Church (which is SPIRITUAL elect Israel) - look at 11:7..."THE ELECT obtained it, but the rest were hardened"
/// Is the church the enemy of the gospel? ///
Romans 11:28 is talking about ETHNIC Israel
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer
/// which tribe are you from (11:1)? ///
Irrelevant - Paul is here talking about the fact that God hasnt abandoned everyone who is outwardly called an "Israelite", by proving that he himself is a Jew - and showing that there are still some of the elect among the nation of Israel, preventing ideas of ANTI-SEMITISM (or replacement theology)
BTW, REPLACEMENT Theology is totally different to COVENANT Theology.
doctorh2005 1 year ago
@doctorh2005
To this I agree. Why did you even start this fight? You must have gotten your idea of what dispensationalism is from somebody who had no idea what it is. The point is that the rules God holds men to change at different times (look up dispensation in a dictionary), and those differences have to be recognized to rightly divide the word of truth. See my other comment about salvation under the law involving works.
ChristianTruthHammer 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer And the Kingdom is here and now, though it won't be fully manifest until Jesus comes for the 2nd time luke 17:21
About those two scriptures you stated I am confused about the point that you are trying to make with Matthew 19, those are things that every follower of Christ should do because if "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. 24He who does not love me will not obey my teaching.
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer With your quote from Acts I still don't follow you, If you believe in the Lord, you will be saved and that belief will help you love Christ and follow his commands, it is not 2 seperate gospels, we are not saved by works, but we do works because we are saved. read the Book of James. No offense but in the words of Deitrich Bonhoeffer, those who think they don't have to follow Christ's commands and still be saved are utilizing cheap grace
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer I think Christians with that theology fall into the same trap as the Pharisees believing that they were saved because they "were children of Abraham" remember that at the judgement day people will say " 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@ChristianTruthHammer 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' I would hate that too happen to anyone.
Anyway It is good to talk to Christians who have different views of scripture so you can debate and get to the truth
God Bless
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
May the peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Dispensationalism is most definitely a modern heresy that was concocted in the early 1800's. When I was young my family became involved with a small independent Baptist Church, and dispensationalism was their main theology. I had sensed there was something drastically wrong with what I was being taught. As an adult, like you, I can now clearly see the truth taught by the Bible and our early Church Fathers.
dlherring1964 1 year ago
@dlherring1964 May his peace be with you as well. All we can do is pray and hope taht those who follow this theology will have their eyes open
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
want me to send your vid to all my Liberal Christian friends? and other Christian friends?
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@IrishShannonTomato Sure That would be great Thank you
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
my "Jesus of Nazareth Public Healthcare" vid you liked & video responded to was attacked by Tea Party "Patriots", Conservative Pharisees & lawless Dispensational "Christians".
they fraudulently flagged it till it got removed. see what they do? i'd not ever nor would most Liberals ever do that to Conservative vids merely because we disagree?! evil & undemocratic. better to just argue at their vid, on the merits. LOL
my gf, Lys has a copy & dozens of our friends too & it already went viral. ^_^
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
btw your beliefs are in line with Liberal Christians. you may not want to hear that. but it's true.
it doesn't mean you're a "Socialist" or seduced by Secularism. don't listen to uneducated delusional talk of "Socialism", "evil govt tryanny" & "community organizers", etc.
Christ was a community organizer. church volunteers are community organizers.
keep a pure perspective. ignore hate & ignorance of Tea Party "Patriots" who spit upon those concerned for the rights & needs of the Poor & the Sick.
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@IrishShannonTomato That is true, I can be quite liberal when it comes to economic policy and the like, the problem is some liberal christians and I differ on theology. I believe in the Virgin Birth as well as a bodily reserection, But to combat the liberal theology fundamentalism was born in the 1920s and it focused almost entirely on post-calvary and nothing on his ethical teachings.
Thats why I like to say I am a moderate theologicaly
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
not all Liberal Christians deny Virgin birth, bodily resurrection & other faith dependent miracles. partly because lots of what Liberal political perspective believes on defending the rights of Working Class Poor & the Sick is sometimes very emotional & faith dependent as well. LOL
not all Liberal Christians are advocates of "Liberal Theology". don't get Liberal political confused with "Liberal Theology". they don't go together & at least half of Liberals reject Liberal theology.
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@IrishShannonTomato And that I think is one of the lies of the religious right they equate the 2 together. I am mostly politicaly liberal, moderate theological, and social conservative, although on some of the major social issues like Abortion and homosexuality I am more right of center then far right.
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
Abortion is neither Left or Right. it's life & well being of humanity that should not be measured by Left or Right. your view is not wrong as long as you're completely pro-Life, Pro-all Life, not just before birth but after birth & all through life till end of life.
on homosexuality, like all sexuality is only wrong if the intention is purely lust without mature devoted love. if not with selfish purely lustful exploitative intent.
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
Comment removed
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@IrishShannonTomato I do consider myself 100% pro-life, I am still in prayer on the issue of Homosexuality
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
if you're perplexed by my mention of Djinnis and their Biblical existence and reliability or truth, read of King Solomon. he was given authority by God to command Djinni & demons. Djinnis both good ones who freely promised eternal loyalty to God & evil Djinnis loyal only to their own neutral selfish desires. he commanded both good & bad Djinnis to build the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. that Temple was essentially built by Djinnis. sounds funny & not Bibilical? look it up. ^_^
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AVoiceCrying33
if you're perplexed by my mention of Djinnis and their Biblical existence and reliability or truth, read of King Solomon. he was given authority by God to command Djinni & demons. Djinnis both good ones who freely promised eternal loyalty to God & evil Djinnis loyal only to their own neutral selfish desires. he commanded both good & bad Djinnis to build the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. that Temple was essentially built by Djinnis. sounds funny & not Bibilical? look it up. ^_^
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
you're right to be suspicious of motives of extremists who overdo End time emphasis.
it's used as excuse to ignore cries of suffering of the Poor & Sick.
the Rapture is coming so why try to better society or advocate for the rights of the Working Class Poor & the Sick?
or . . . the next life is what's important. this life, we need not care.
but that's wrong! this life is equally important! it's the training ground to develop spiritual character so it's high quality for next life!
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@IrishShannonTomato end times theology is important some liberal Christians can go their whole lives without reading Revelation but you can't be blinded by it so you don't do the good work that our Lord and Master commands us to do, helping the poor and the sick and preaching the Good News.
It was good to chat with you again :)
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
another lie of the religious Right is that Sodom & Gomorrah was sinful enough to be destroyed because of sexual promiscuity. that is wrong. it did have sinful sexual promiscuity. but that wasnt the straw that broke the camel's back for God.
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
Sodom & Gomorrah did have sinful sexual promiscuity. but that wasnt the straw that broke the camel's back for God.
if you read the Scriptures, the last straw for God that angered him enough to destroy it was, "they lived with such careless ease and ignorance that they ignored the cries of the Poor and the Sick." hmm? LOL. tell your religious Right friends to put some thought behind that little quandary. LOL. ^_^
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@IrishShannonTomato Ezekiel 16 But you did ackologe that sexual promiscuity was part of it. Check out my latest video it's my interpretation of revelation and the end of the age
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
you didnt try to answer why God sent two Archangels accompanied by their lesser servants, Djinni earth angels to kill & destroy, instead of sending Angels of Death like the Plagues of Egypt. ; j
even the sexual promiscuity sinful behavior, God didnt consider homosexuality the offense. do you know what the two sexual offenses were by Sodom & Gomorrah that really offended God?
exploitation of innocents, seducing (and rape) of young children & the other was rape (of men & women)
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33
and who did the Lord send to destroy Sodom & Gomorrah for wealthier people ignoring cries of the Poor and the Sick?
he didnt send Angels of Death but two Archangels to kill & destroy. why not send a wave of hovering Angels of Death like the Plagues? that's significant. can you tell why? ^_^
in Arabic/Persian version Archangels accompanied by genies (djinnis)
btw read my new profile. i'm part Persian & have an ancient Persian prayer in it. consider it a prayer to inspire you. ^_^
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
@IrishShannonTomato I will have to think on that one
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
brilliant! magnificently done! you surprise & impress me yet again! ^_^
don't let it go to your head or become conceited but you epitomize a true disciple of Christ. shh. dont let it go to your head. stay humble! LOL
all you said & your entire attitude is precisely the heart of Christ. keep doing these vids!
rightwingwatch & crooksandliars are incredible sites for fact & truth & can teach you a lot.
IrishShannonTomato 1 year ago
We are saved by grace through faith resulting in obedience to Jesus Christ. We have a new covenant because Jesus fulfilled the old covenant with the Israelis showing that He is the Messiah (the Christ). The Old Covenant was the blueprint, but Jesus Christ is the reality. If you are saved, you want to obey Christ. By their fruits will you know them. Just because someone is well known does not mean they are right.
gloryboundkev 1 year ago 5
@gloryboundkev AMEN I want to obey Him, sometimes I don't out of fear,shame, pride, laziness, or selfishness but THe more I pray and the more I abide in Him the more I am able to follow Him and serve Him.
We lookl through a glass darkley and we won't be perfect until He comes again but he does give us the strenght to be better day by day
God Bless you
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33 I see you mentioned you "want" to obey. Our belief is unto belief, not in working our way in by the law. Christ came to fulfill the law, and met the righteous requirements of the law. He provided for us, what we were unable to do before under the law....to keep it! We stand before the presence of our maker, free of sin and accusation at all times! We keep the Covenant! Yes, we do!
jungian9111 1 year ago
Hi AVoiceCrying33..
My understanding is much different than most. So, please don't be offended. But the fulfillment of time was 2000 years ago, and the prince of darkness was cast out then. I am no longer under the curse of accusation. Christ came to fulfill the law, in order to set us free from our sin. I simply do not believe were sinners any longer in Christ. Or its dead, buried in Christ baptism. Repentance has an end...
jungian9111 1 year ago
jungian9111: If by fulfillment of time you mean full Preterism, we part ways (Im orthodox Preterist). Otherwise, more hold your view than you suppose. I hold that Christs death was the ultimate exorcism (as you say, cast out). And I think that Voice Crying would likely agree because it is Biblical.
KeeperOfTheWord 1 year ago
@KeeperOfTheWord What is the difference between full Preterism and orthodox Preterism?
I believe that all 4 views of Revelation have merit from a biblical standpoint. i am a mixture of Historicist and futerist but I don't think anybody really knows and if they claim they know with a certainty, I do not trust them. I made a theory in a new video. I don't know if it's right or not, but it could be.
God Bless you as well
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
VC: Full Preterism: Mt 24 & 25 was fulfilled in 70 AD. Orthodox Preterism: Mt 24:1-35 fulfilled in 70 AD, Mt 26:36-25:46 is still future. All 4 systems are somewhat Biblical; I hold mostly to the Ideal interpretation. Progressive Dispensationalism is (thankfully) much closer to Covenant Theology: Christ is now on Davids throne in Glory, allowing some fulfillment of OT prophecies. In PD, NT can reinterpret the OT and is more affirming of OT/NT unity. Some regard PD as Classic Pre-mill variant.
KeeperOfTheWord 1 year ago
@KeeperOfTheWord I keep the Covenant and the conditions of it! I walk with my maker on holy ground!
For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
And that he might reconcile both into God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby; Ephesians 2
jungian9111 1 year ago
@jungian9111 Yeah I have to disagree with that because of 1 John 8If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives. We are still sinners but we are sinners saved by Grace and he makes us less and less but we will still sin
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
@AVoiceCrying33 Yes, I know the verse you are referring to well. The next verse is..
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from (all) unrighteousness.
Who has own self bare our sins in his own body on a tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed! 1 Peter 2:24 I feel no sin...period!
jungian9111 1 year ago
Usually reserved for damning error, heresy may overstate the case; but as I see it, Dispensational theology has very serious problems. It has a strong, Gnostic benty. DT is seriously divided. Progressive Dispensationalism is much closer to a covenant view of Scripture. Chafer is old school. I often say that we push kingdom into the future to avoid the persecutions Revelation describes, that will surely follow a truly kingdom-incarnational faith. Blessings!
KeeperOfTheWord 1 year ago
@KeeperOfTheWord Heresy might of been a tad much I will agree, I am kmind of confused about progressive dispensationalism. I haven't heard of that term before.
They get the future kingdom from Revelation 20 I believe and I do believe in a future total Kingdom but I also do believe that we have to live a kingdom-incarnational faith here and now
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago
I think your Cat is getting mad at you?
Hey I like you messege here!!
May the grace of our LORD JESUS CHRIST be with you...
jesuskopp 1 year ago
Good video. Jesus bless you brother. ~David~
redbonesmkia 1 year ago
@redbonesmkia May He continue to bless you as well
AVoiceCrying33 1 year ago