What is Acts 9 Dispensationalism?

I did a google search, please tell me where it is wrong so I could better understand you better.

Ultra Dispensationalism A dispensationalism scheme with more than one dispensation between Pentecost and the Millennial Kingdom. Salvation in certain dispensations may require actions other than faith, such as baptism or circumcision.

OverviewUltradispensationalim's major difference from other dispensational schemes is the distinction of more than one dispensation from the time of Pentecost in Acts 2 until the millennial kingdom. The prefix "ultra" does not imply anything more significant than seeing a greater number of dispensations than a "classic" dispensational scheme. It is not meant to imply that the view is fanatical or even incorrect.

Different Flavors of Ultra-Dispensationalism
1. Acts 9 Dispensationalism. The church (the body of Christ) begins with Paul in Acts 9. The Gospels, 1 & 2 Peter, James, and the early Pauline epistles are inapplicable to the believer today.
2. Acts 9, 12 out Dispensationalism. The same as the previous example, but emphasizes that the original 12 disciples are not in the body of Christ.
3. Acts 28 Dispensationalism. The church (the body of Christ) does not begin until Acts 28. Almost the entirety of the New Testament is viewed as given to the Jews and inapplicable to the believer today.

Common Beliefs of Ultra-Dispensationalists
1. Peter's ministry is completely distinct from Paul's. Peter taught a different gospel , one that included being baptized in order to be saved. The believer today has no reason to be baptized, because it was in a previous dispensation and is no longer a requirement.
2. Salvation today, in the current dispensation, is by grace through faith, apart from baptism, circumcision, or any other work. But this has not always been so.
3. The body of Christ did not begin until Paul began his ministry to Gentiles.
4. The church under Peter was a distinctly Jewish church, not members of the body of Christ, and not equal to Paul's church.

Think meat cleaver chopping a gideon bible to bits. THAT's dispensationalism. classical, hyper, ultra, progressive...chop chop chop chop chop chop chop (rwahtly dawviiidding the warrd of Gawd)

I am getting no responses from the dispensationalist

I am getting no responses from the dispensationalist

I am getting no responses from the Hyper/Ultra/Mid-Acts dispensationalist, I must have hit a nerve.

Do a google search on "Acts 9 Dispensationalism", and you will find out that some of these groups that believe in this are actually cults!

See
http://www.afcministry.com/AFC_Mid Acts Concerns.mp3

Re: I am getting no responses from the dispensationalist

Re: I am getting no responses from the dispensationalist

Originally posted by Nimrod

I am getting no responses from the Hyper/Ultra/Mid-Acts dispensationalist, I must have hit a nerve.

Do a google search on "Acts 9 Dispensationalism", and you will find out that some of these groups that believe in this are actually cults!

See
http://www.afcministry.com/AFC_Mid Acts Concerns.mp3

Click to expand...

I've listened to part of it so far (got interupted) he claims that we are KJV only. not true.

Originally posted by csmuda

Think meat cleaver chopping a gideon bible to bits. THAT's dispensationalism. classical, hyper, ultra, progressive...chop chop chop chop chop chop chop (rwahtly dawviiidding the warrd of Gawd)

Click to expand...

Very well painted picture, I must say. And pretty accurate, too!

Re: Re: I am getting no responses from the dispensationalist

Re: Re: I am getting no responses from the dispensationalist

Originally posted by deardelmar

I've listened to part of it so far (got interupted) he claims that we are KJV only. not true.

Click to expand...

Oh, I agree that no one that I know of on this board are KJV Only.

Other than that, what about the other points, were they correct?

Re: What is Acts 9 Dispensationalism?

Originally posted by Nimrod

Common Beliefs of Ultra-Dispensationalists
.........................................................
3. The body of Christ did not begin until Paul began his ministry to Gentiles.
.........................................................

Click to expand...

The Body of Christ began with Paul's ministry? I thought the Body of Christ "began" with Christ.

By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Hebrews 10:10

Click to expand...

The people who believe that the Body of Christ began with Paul's ministry do not understand what the body of Christ is.

If any of those people are reading this, please read all three parts of my post What a BODY. You can read it by clicking
here. I hope it helps you.

Originally posted by csmuda

Think meat cleaver chopping a gideon bible to bits. THAT's dispensationalism. classical, hyper, ultra, progressive...chop chop chop chop chop chop chop (rwahtly dawviiidding the warrd of Gawd)

Click to expand...

There is nothing in the Bible that I would chop !

Originally posted by csmuda

Think meat cleaver chopping a gideon bible to bits. THAT's dispensationalism. classical, hyper, ultra, progressive...chop chop chop chop chop chop chop (rwahtly dawviiidding the warrd of Gawd)

Click to expand...

How does it feel to wake up every morning being such a doofus?

Nimrod I recommend reading this short overview... Testing the Things that Differ.

Knight, Numnuts knows about this already and has made his mind up and seeks to ridicule and mock. Same ole same ole

Re: What is Acts 9 Dispensationalism?

Originally posted by Nimrod


Common Beliefs of Ultra-Dispensationalists
1. Peter's ministry is completely distinct from Paul's. Peter taught a different gospel , one that included being baptized in order to be saved. The believer today has no reason to be baptized, because it was in a previous dispensation and is no longer a requirement.
2. Salvation today, in the current dispensation, is by grace through faith, apart from baptism, circumcision, or any other work. But this has not always been so.
3. The body of Christ did not begin until Paul began his ministry to Gentiles.
4. The church under Peter was a distinctly Jewish church, not members of the body of Christ, and not equal to Paul's church.

Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with any of this except for no. 4. The church under Peter was a distinctly Jewish church. The Body of Christ includes both the Jewish believers and the Gentile believers.

Originally posted by drbrumley

Knight, Numnuts knows about this already and has made his mind up and seeks to ridicule and mock. Same ole same ole

Click to expand...

Ouch!

Re: What is Acts 9 Dispensationalism?

Originally posted by Nimrod

I did a google search, please tell me where it is wrong so I could better understand you better.

Ultra Dispensationalism A dispensationalism scheme with more than one dispensation between Pentecost and the Millennial Kingdom. Salvation in certain dispensations may require actions other than faith, such as baptism or circumcision.

Click to expand...

Actually, they are actions of faith. Not actions apart from faith. And they are only actions of following the law. Minus the sacraficesm, because Christ was the final sacrafice.

OverviewUltradispensationalim's major difference from other dispensational schemes is the distinction of more than one dispensation from the time of Pentecost in Acts 2 until the millennial kingdom. The prefix "ultra" does not imply anything more significant than seeing a greater number of dispensations than a "classic" dispensational scheme. It is not meant to imply that the view is fanatical or even incorrect.

Click to expand...

Okay.

Different Flavors of Ultra-Dispensationalism
1. Acts 9 Dispensationalism. The church (the body of Christ) begins with Paul in Acts 9. The Gospels, 1 & 2 Peter, James, and the early Pauline epistles are inapplicable to the believer today.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't call them inapplicable. I would say there are things that are not applicable to believers today. And there are also things that were not applicable to believers back then. Whoever things were written to are who they are applicable to. 1 John was written to unbelievers, offering the gospel.

2. Acts 9, 12 out Dispensationalism. The same as the previous example, but emphasizes that the original 12 disciples are not in the body of Christ.

Click to expand...

I thought it was that the 12 tribes were out. Since Israel, as a whole, rejected Messiah. And salvation was brought to individuals, after that. Any other Acts 9/12 outer care to let me know?

3. Acts 28 Dispensationalism. The church (the body of Christ) does not begin until Acts 28. Almost the entirety of the New Testament is viewed as given to the Jews and inapplicable to the believer today.

Click to expand...

Never heard of this. How do they differentiate? Do they believe Paul's letters are applicable?

Common Beliefs of Ultra-Dispensationalists
1. Peter's ministry is completely distinct from Paul's. Peter taught a different gospel , one that included being baptized in order to be saved. The believer today has no reason to be baptized, because it was in a previous dispensation and is no longer a requirement.

Click to expand...

Okay.

2. Salvation today, in the current dispensation, is by grace through faith, apart from baptism, circumcision, or any other work. But this has not always been so.

Click to expand...

Yeah. But faith has always been a part of it.

3. The body of Christ did not begin until Paul began his ministry to Gentiles.

Click to expand...

Uh huh.

4. The church under Peter was a distinctly Jewish church, not members of the body of Christ, and not equal to Paul's church.

Click to expand...

I'm goin' with delmar on this one.

Originally posted by Knight

How does it feel to wake up every morning being such a doofus?

Click to expand...

Not very good. but he asked 'please tell him where it is wrong.' I apologize for being cruel and thoughtless. Dispensationalism (in all forms) is theologically shallow and misguided. All the enegy spent on this very young dogma, tsk. allow me to quote Robert E. Webber from his book "Common Roots"

...the biblical idea of the church as the new creation challenges the overemphasis on the church as "invisible" or "spiritual." Some of us have failed to come to grips with the biblical emphasis on the church as a visible entity within history. In our century, this failure, at least in part, may be attributed to the heavy concentration on the future through the influence of a misguided understanding of premillennialism. Because the new creation has been regarded as a future event, the church in the present is often viewed as unimportant as compared with the church in the future. Thus, the emphasis has fallen naturally on the church in the mind of God, the church which will be raised in the Rapture, the church which will return with Christ to reign in the millennium. Furthermore, among some, this view has propagated a conviction that the established church is an apostate instrument of Satan, a means by which even the elect will be led astray. This emphasis has created (especially among fundamentalist and dispensationalist evangelicals) an anti-institutional bias, and a schismatic remnant mentality. The most extreme result of this is a suspicious attitude toward any emphasis on the church as a visible and tangible society in the world.

Click to expand...

Christ is reigning now as King on the throne of David. He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything. The time when God will "restore everything" refers to the second coming- not the "pretrib rapture"- the last judgment, and the removal of sin from the world. (Acts 3:21).

All the pivotal turns in history as recorded in canon are merely Christ's Kingdom spreading through His Holy Spirit in the visible church. I don't know, I guess I am a doofus, but; Church history is just the Lord Jesus Christ building His Church visibly. The visible Christian church on earth with the Holy Spirit residing in the body of believers is where and how He will destroy all dominion, authority and power for He must reign until He has put all His eneimies under His feet. He is building His church now, right now, everyday. Not in some future physical literal 1,000 years on earth but now.

Study historical theology, not dispensationalism. :Servent:

If that is Webber's idea of dispensationalism, then he has no idea what dispensationalism is. The church exists now. And is great, and should be great. And it is very visible, and very tangible. And should be, even moreso than it is. There are too many cowards in our congregations today. People, too afraid to speak out against the ungodly ways of life that we see. Even within our own fellowship. The church should rise up, and be the voice of God to this planet. Speaking against, not only immorality among the godless, or injustices and atrocities [whether in the name of God, or not], but also against the lies preached within the walls of "churches" everywhere. Now is as good a time as any to preach the truth of the freedom we have in Christ. Affirm what Paul wrote: Freedom in Christ! And silence the lies that keep people bound! We are dead to sin! How can we live in it any longer?!

Originally posted by csmuda
All the enegy spent on this very young dogma, tsk.

Click to expand...

I wonder if anyone ever said such a thing to Luther or Calvin? :think:

Originally posted by lighthouse

The church exists now. And is great, and should be great. And it is very visible, and very tangible.

Click to expand...

Tell that to Calvin and Luther. This would raise another question, What is the one true church that is visible?


Ooops, I forgot, dispensationalist don't like Church history, especially when it disagrees with them.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you don't know who the one true church is, Nimrod.

Originally posted by Nimrod

Tell that to Calvin and Luther. This would raise another question, What is the one true church that is visible?


Ooops, I forgot, dispensationalist don't like Church history, especially when it disagrees with them.

Click to expand...

It's not that I don't like Church history, but that the history of the "Christian Church" is , indeed very very sad and has much to be blamed for!