What is your understanding of dispensationalism?

[hfsturges]

Lysimachus,

It is difficult to understand the covenant(s) by critiquing false beliefs. Better to start from scratch with the truth of what the Bible says.

There is an overarching Everlasting Covenant of God that was formulated in the eternity before Creation. Jesus is called the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). It was held in reserve, a mystery not fully understood until Jesus came to this earth. As the covenant of God, men had no part in forming it and could only reverently believe and accept what God had done.

The covenant with men was made up of the Everlasting Covenant of God as a gift to man for his salvation. The second part, making it a covenant with men included the response - belief, faith, and consent to the work of grace.

In this way the Everlasting Covenant of God, the “New Covenant” was given to Adam and Eve, and to Abraham. A covenant was made with Noah, but it seems to be different in how it was given.

The covenant with Abraham was an everlasting covenant, intended to pass on to his immediate family, and to all his descendants through history. It was the covenant confirmed by Christ on Calvary. And it is the covenant for the church today. (Galatians 3:29)

Questions arise:

What was the covenant ratified at Sinai?

What is the Old Covenant at Sinai, and in Hebrews 8,9?

What is the best explanation for “replacement theology?”

And others.........

[12tribes]

One problem with putting the final week in the future apart from the fact it takes away from the meaning of Daniel 9 is that they put the 42 months as part of this, so they use the year/day principle for the final week of Daniel but, literal time for the 42 months, they must both be the same IF they are part of each other

[Lysimachus]

hfsturges,

You can read the full "Prophetic Toolchest for Dismantling the Dispensationalist Delusion" right here: http://www.hearingthetruth.org/pt_mainpage.html

Simply click the "Prophetic toolchest table of contents", and there you will find all 12 chapters. It's not published yet because D.S. Farris passed away before he was able to get it published. His brother is working on it. So far, it's only available online for free. You'll enjoy reading about the covenants in his Israel of God chapter. I don't agree with 100% everything Dax said, but those things that I disagree with him on are very minor and don't distract from the big picture.

Also, enjoy their radio shows under the Audio Library after clicking www.HearingTheTruth.org -- I recommend listening to their 2 hour presentation entitled "Futurism Part 1 and Futurism Part 2".

Their 4 -part Israel of God series is amazing too, not to mention their 5 -part "85 Stupid Questions Presented to Sabbatarians".

Bear in mind that they come from a rough Missourian background, and therefore, some of this ruthlessness was carried over after Dax's conversion. I encourage people to focus on the data and look past his ruggedness. He spent the last 17 years of his life trying to witness for Christ and even opened his home to poor people. At the funeral, when all the people were asked how many of them remember Dax trying to get them to memorize scripture, everyone raised their hand.

[Lysimachus]

One problem with putting the final week in the future apart from the fact it takes away from the meaning of Daniel 9 is that they put the 42 months as part of this, so they use the year/day principle for the final week of Daniel but, literal time for the 42 months, they must both be the same IF they are part of each other

[ClubV12]

They may be futurists but at least their not "1335 Futurists", that group is strictly reserved for Adventists. :)

[jasd]

>>...the Church is taken to heaven and dwell in the mansions prepared for them<<

You wax eisegesic... Writ does not state that “the Church” has “mansions prepared for them”.

>>--because they have to come right back down after they are caught up to reign on the earth for a thousand years.<<

The Greek lexicon places those (acting as an emissarial delegation; or, for those whose vernacular proximates mine – a welcome wagon :-) “caught up”, as being caught up only to the circumambient air of earth - from whence they return, escorting the heavenly host, to earth – where Jesus Christ and the righteous saints will, indeed, reign for the millennium.

Remember, those caught up are no longer clothed upon with their former woeful earthly tents/tabernacles, but in ‘glorified’ bodies worthy to ‘escort’ the King of Kings to His earthly reign.

>>They leave no slot for the saints to be in heaven.<<

Indeed. Writ does not state that, at this time, the saint’s destination is heaven. It is only stated so in extraBiblical writings.

>>Adventists resolve all this unnecessary quagmire they have found themselves in. They are ALL wrong! The time when Christ puts his feet on the Mount of Olives is NOT at the Second Coming, but at the Third Coming at the END of the millennium.<<

Indeed, “All Wrong” – because Revelation 6, sixth seal, informs us that every mountain and island is moved out of their places. That’s a measurable time before either a Second Advent or a Third Advent. Fourth or Fifth for that matter.

So, the Zechariah model obliges the expositor to take his prophecy as metaphor for the Tribal signifiers of both ‘Mount’ and ‘Olive’ – with the corresponding ‘Jerusalem’ as the Jerusalem of Prophecy and not the Old City Jerusalem.

>>And the 1000 years will not be on earth, so this is why they are so confused---as long as they hold to a view that there is a 1000 year reign on earth, they will forever be fighting amongst themselves trying to resolve this apparent dilemma.<<

The Protesting .orgs fight amongst themselves over every jot and tittle, supposed or not, of Writ.

>>At the Second Coming, after the tribulation, all the saints that ever lived get raptured and are then taken to the New Jerusalem from there on. How RIDICULOUS for post-Tribulation Dispensationalists (and even traditional Historicist Pre-Millennialists) to think that the saints get caught up, only to be set RIGHT back down on the earth again.

Are God's people some kind of Yo-Yos?<< [ed.jasd]

Mysterium logicum? Why is it ridiculous for Gd’s people to be perceived as Yo-Yos when viewed from one end of the Parousia and not the other?—I mean, aren’t you saying that those who are already in Paradise/heaven(?) – that is, Gd’s people – and who return with Jesus Christ in the Parousia... are considered Yo-Yos?—because

they immediately return to heaven with those who are caught up to meet Jesus Christ in the [circumambient] air of earth?

The Yo-Yo dismissal is hyper-bolic-ventilation.

>>Is God that WEAK that he must remove them off the earth so that he can punish the wicked?<<

No, Gd had been punishing the wicked since time immemorial by then. Instead, Jesus Christ returns to earth in such glory that even the ‘prophets’ could not find words to describe the attending glory, which encompasses – the most worthy of all Gd’s creation – men and angels.

>>God can protect ANYONE, no matter how many plagues and disasters are falling around them.<<

There are some what sez – that is indeed what Gd does; that is, He raptures them... that they may be spared the wrath of Gd poured out upon the earth.

[jasd]

>>One problem with putting the final week in the future...<<

Whoo-ee!—count the number of problems the ‘Remnant’ has with its ‘orthodox’ reading of Daniel 9.

>>...apart from the fact it takes away from the meaning of Daniel 9 is that they put the 42 months as part of this, so they use the year/day principle for the final week of Daniel<<

A for instance: one uses a State Map to get to aunt Mable’s town. When arriving at that town, one then recourses to a street guide of that town. Different needs, different apps.

>>...but, literal time for the 42 months, they must both be the same IF they are part of each other<<

The ‘problem’ rectifies – post-Revelation 9 – where/when the prophetic day/year time principle thenceforward no longer obtains. It is made evident that literal time is thereafter in effect, as man’s threescore and ten comes into conflict with the ‘fact’ that man, seeks death and desiring to die, cannot – for the duration of 5 months or a 150 years, that is, should the ‘prophetic day/year’ still obtain. (Rev 9:5,6)

[hfsturges]

Lysimachus,

Thank you for the references. I downloaded all twelve chapters on Dispensationalism in pdf. Mr. Farris has done a monumental work. It is going to take me a while to get around to reading it all. Maybe I can put it on my Kindle?

I don't know yet what his beliefs are. The importance of this whole discussion is that most SDAs - including Doug Bachelor, Angel Rodriguez, Skip MacCarty, an SDA pastor friend, and many others believe a modified dispensational view. This leaves us vulnerable to attacks on the law and the Sabbath.

Thanks again.

[BobRyan]

Dispensationalism insists on a radical division between the Testaments and sees no organic relation between them. Dispensationalism also makes God arbitrary - a greater sin.

`g

It is a "two gospel model" that teaches "another gospel" before the cross - contrary to Paul's claim in the book of Galatians.

in Christ,

Bob

[olger]

zactly

[Lysimachus]

Anyone here having as much of a hard-time as I am trying to wrap their brain around JASD's posts?

Maybe it's just me, but I have an extremely hard time understanding him, what his points are, and where he stands.

[olger]

He's a secret agent and writes rather cryptically - but we still love him!

[Lysimachus]

Lysimachus,

Thank you for the references. I downloaded all twelve chapters on Dispensationalism in pdf. Mr. Farris has done a monumental work. It is going to take me a while to get around to reading it all. Maybe I can put it on my Kindle?

I don't know yet what his beliefs are. The importance of this whole discussion is that most SDAs - including Doug Bachelor, Angel Rodriguez, Skip MacCarty, an SDA pastor friend, and many others believe a modified dispensational view. This leaves us vulnerable to attacks on the law and the Sabbath.

Thanks again.

You're very welcome hfsturges.

A "modified dispensational view"? Doug Batchelor? Angel Rodriguez? O.O

Wow, this is a first! When you have some time, please feel free to explain this modified view. As far as I know, Doug has always been very orthodox in his Adventist beliefs. But I'm always learning and hearing something new that surprises me about our leaders. Or should it surprise me?

[olger]

What is modified dispensationalism?

[Gibs]

I'm not going to get into this dispensationalist thing a lot but one thing they advocate is the moving the 70'th week of Dan. down to the end. That can not be as no one can do that and God isn't either. They take the "cut off" here to mean the 70'th week but it is the Messiah that was cut off in the middle of the week is what the prophecy is about.

Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Da 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

When His blood was shed that ended all those sacrifices and oblations. What it all pointed to all those years was fulfilled.

The seventieth week ended the year AD 33 and Christ died on the cross exactly that mid year of that week as prophecied. That prophecy did not fail in any way and the seventieth fell back then, over and done with.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Lysimachus]

I'm not going to get into this dispensationalist thing a lot but one thing they advocate is the moving the 70'th week of Dan. down to the end. That can not be as no one can do that and God isn't either. They take the "cut off" here to mean the 70'th week but it is the Messiah that was cut off in the middle of the week is what the prophecy is about.

Da 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Da 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

When His blood was shed that ended all those sacrifices and oblations. What it all pointed to all those years was fulfilled.

The seventieth week ended the year AD 33 and Christ died on the cross exactly that mid year of that week as prophecied. That prophecy did not fail in any way and the seventieth fell back then, over and done with.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

Well said for the most part, Gib. However, the 70th week did not end in 33 AD. It was 34 A.D. New scholarly research has vindicated this fact:

http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/sir-robert-anderson.htm

http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/harold-hoehner-70-weeks.htm

Christ's death was in 31 A.D.

[jasd]

>>Anyone here having as much of a hard-time as I am trying to wrap their brain around JASD's posts?<<

“Hard-time”?—but not impossible, yes? Skip the skip-reading – and read with care that which you do read. I mean, how difficult is it to notice that my ‘handle’ is correctly read in the diminutive and not raised? It seems you employ the same carelessness when you imply that Writ informs that the resurrected and translated saints hie off to their “mansions” in the sky – for a thousand years; whereas, Writ neither states nor implies the sort.

Measure twice, thrice, and cut once.

>>Maybe it's just me, but I have an extremely hard time understanding him, what his points are, and where he stands.<<

I’ve found that clarifying difficult or questionable information requires the simplest interrogatory. Gd uses interrogatories – quite often – matter of fact.

So, ‘nuff with the attempted and personal negatives, but rather – ask, ask, ask – about that which you have difficulty wrapping your brain around. You’re not too proud to do so, are you?

Elementary, dear fellow

[Gibs]

Lysimachus,

I would have to disagree with their calculations as the decree given to start the prophecy was BC 457, a Jubilee yr. and so 70 weeks makes us exactly 10 Jubilee cycles and so that would bring us to the end of the AD 33 yr. and then AD 34 was the next Jubilee yr and proved to be a new beginning, the gospel went to the Gentiles and had ended for the Jews AD 33. You see we come down 457 yrs and then up 33, so 457+33=490. No the Jubilee calendar proves the dates, too many other known Jubilee dates to prove it. I'm asumming you know a Jubilee cycle is 49 yrs. It is a never ending recurring cycles of 7 times 7 years. The Jubilee yr., the fiftieth always falls the first year of the next cycle. Many have a problem with that but is not hard to see. Go here for a fuller explanation as here it is laid out as it must be. http://www.itsaboutthattime.net/Calendar_Synopsis.htm

There you will find he has laid out some immoveable Jubilee years.

The problem may be as to the calendar used as to when a yr. starts and ends. Today we start it 1'st of Jan. but the spring equinox is probably when Yahweh starts it and some Jews in the fall some time.

This thread though is of dispensationalism and it's absurdities and this is the bad one to me any way. This has too many people chasing rainbows that aren't there.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[jasd]

I’d like to mention that there is no distinction being addressed that distinguishes between Biblical Dispensationalism and the ‘philosophies’ of Fundies; that is, dogmatic ‘Dispensationalism’.

Big difference!—and worth noting, else all is deceptive dogmatology.

Moreover, I note still – that the most learned among us continue indulging sloppiness in that they make no distinction between the Tribes of Israel, the Two Kingdoms and their dispositions, and today’s Jews v those of past times. Nor have they bothered to correlate the wicked husbandmen and the children of Esau/Edom who ruled ‘the vineyard’ of Jews circa Jesus Christ...; that is, circa BC/AD. [...]

There are but few in today’s State of Israel who are truly Jews, but say they are Jews. The Jewish historian Arthur Koestler .(The Thirteenth Tribe), among others, specifically wrote to that singularity.

Gd informs, in the books of Samuel and Kings, that ALL the tribes would leave Old Canaanland – never to return. The exact words are, [when they reach the land that Gd prepared for them] “they would not be moved” – ie, they would not be returning.

‘Horatio’s philosophies’, as well those of the Fundamentalists (and a few of you here),

notwihtstanding.

[Lysimachus]

Lysimachus,

I would have to disagree with their calculations as the decree given to start the prophecy was BC 457, a Jubilee yr. and so 70 weeks makes us exactly 10 Jubilee cycles and so that would bring us to the end of the AD 33 yr. and then AD 34 was the next Jubilee yr and proved to be a new beginning, the gospel went to the Gentiles and had ended for the Jews AD 33. You see we come down 457 yrs and then up 33, so 457+33=490. No the Jubilee calendar proves the dates, too many other known Jubilee dates to prove it. I'm asumming you know a Jubilee cycle is 49 yrs. It is a never ending recurring cycles of 7 times 7 years. The Jubilee yr., the fiftieth always falls the first year of the next cycle. Many have a problem with that but is not hard to see. Go here for a fuller explanation as here it is laid out as it must be. http://www.itsaboutthattime.net/Calendar_Synopsis.htm

There you will find he has laid out some immoveable Jubilee years.

The problem may be as to the calendar used as to when a yr. starts and ends. Today we start it 1'st of Jan. but the spring equinox is probably when Yahweh starts it and some Jews in the fall some time.

This thread though is of dispensationalism and it's absurdities and this is the bad one to me any way. This has too many people chasing rainbows that aren't there.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

Gibs, you have no clue what you are talking about. This is an old argument held before the year "0" was discovered. This has been categorically debunked by even non-Adventist scholars the world-over. ALL of them recognize that if we count 490 from 457, we arrive at 34 A.D. Sound scholarship with heavy-duty mathmatics and calendars have unapologetically refuted this.

It's not a matter of disagreeing Gibs. You have no choice but to agree with us. You are completely clueless on this matter.

[Lysimachus]

Deal with Pickle's arguments rather than saying I am wrong. The math does not lie.

[Gibs]

Nope Lysimachus,

BC 457 down through BC 1 is 457 years from ad ad 1 through ad 33 is 33 yrs, added it comes to 490 yrs.

Ya has to count the year 457 as one yr 456 is yr 2 and finally bc 1 you have 457 yrs, then and you count ad 1 as the first yr. and ad 33 is the 33 yr.and that is for sure. You have BC 1 followed by AD 1 and that is how it has to be.

You started with a Jubilee yr. BC 457 and 10 cycles ends AD 33, then AD 34 is the Jubilee again.

I rest my case, and whether you can agree or not is OK.

His Blessings to you anyway.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Lysimachus]

Gibs,

You're DEAD wrong. :)

[Lysimachus]

I will now quote Dr. William Shea, Ph.D. from his book "Daniel" on pages 160-162, validating that the Gospel went out to the Gentiles in 34 A.D., and none-other.

• THE END OF THE 70TH WEEK:

  "We have established 457 B.C. as the beginning date for Daniel's seventy weeks. We have seen that the sixty-nine weeks, or 483 years, ended in A.D. 27 with Jesus' baptism. The next questions become: When did the seventy weeks end, and what event marked its termination?

  Seventy prophetic weeks equal 490 prophetic days or literal years. Simple addition tells us that if we add 490 years to 457 B.C. we reach A.D. 34. What happened in A.D. 34 to mark the conclusion of the seventy weeks? This date is too late for the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus which took place three or four years earlier. Some other event must be considered.

  The stoning of Stephen, described in Acts 7, is an event that has attracted considerable attention as marking the end of the seventy weeks--both for its theological significance as well as its timing. The narrative records no specific date for Stephen's death, but indirect evidence places it in A.D. 34. How do we arrive at this conclusion?

  The estimated date for Stephen's martyrdom is based on the career of the apostle Paul. He was still unconverted at Stephen's death, since he stood by and held the coats of those who stoned him (see Acts 7:58). A short time later, Saul left for Damascus to persecute Christians there. On the way to Damascus he was converted from Saul the Pharisee to Paul the Christian apostle (see Acts 9:1-9). If Paul's conversion can be dated, the stoning of Stephen can also be placed within narrow limits.

  In Galatians 1, Paul gives some biographical details about his career as an apostle, referring especially to his visits to Jerusalem. He made only brief and infrequent visits to Jerusalem, and he gives us some chronological information about them. He says the first visit came 3 years after his conversion (see verse 18); the second occurred 14 years after the first (see Galatians 2:1). Then shortly after his second visit to Jerusalem, Paul left on his second missionary journey which took him to Corinth (see Acts 18). While at Corinth, Paul appeared before the proconsul Gallio (see verse 12). So Paul would have stood before Gallio 17 years following his conversion (14 years between his second and first visit to Jerusalem added to the 3 years between his first Jerusalem visit and his conversion). From an inscription found in Corinth, we know that Gallio's one-year pro-consulship in Corinth occurred in A.D. 51. If the 17 years for Paul's two visits to Jerusalem are subtracted from the date of Paul's appearance before Gallio, then his conversion and Stephen's stoning should be dated to A.D. 34. (51 - 17 = 34). This date, A.D. 34 is the one New Testament scholars commonly favor for Stephen's death and paul's conversion. We can't be so precise to determine the month or day, but it is a close estimate for the year itself.

  Thus this book takes the position that Daniel's seventy weeks came to an end in A.D. 34 with the stoning of Stephen and the conversion of Paul. We already discussed the theological significance of Stephen's death in the context of the last phrase of Daniel 9:24). There we said there were four areas of theological significance related to Stephen's martyrdom: (1) the gruop to whom Stephen gave his final speech--the Sanhedrin, the highest religious body in the land; (2) the form of his speech--a covenant lawsuit speech like those given by Old Testament prophets; (3) the prophetic nature of his experience at the time of his death when he looked up in vision into heaven itself; and (4) the fact that Paul's conversion has its roots in Stephen's death, so that Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, takes the place of Stephen the powerful preacher to Israel. For these reasons, Stephen's death at the end of the seventy weeks can be seen as a highly significant point of transition from the era of Israel as the elect nation of God to the era of the church." (Dr. William H. Shea, Ph.D., Daniel, pp. 160-162)

With this in mind, your Jubilee calculations must be flawed, without having to try and dissect them. Thank God.

I think the 34 A.D. date is pretty set in stone. I haven't found a flaw with this yet, but you're more than welcome to try! :)

[Gibs]

Lysimachus,

Sure, the problem is,

They didn't count one of the 1 years in. First you count down through BC 1 and then start with AD 1 and count up. That will make it end then with the year AD 33. That made their count have to go up a yr. too far. Many have made that mistake.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.