Your opinion is noted.
ECT Acts 26:22-23 prove MAD to be a lie plus many other verses of scripture.
- Thread starter dodge
- Start date
Your opinion is noted.
Peter denied the resurrection,prior to its occurrence, while for 3 years, prior to the DBR, he preached the gospel of the kingdom. Can one deny the resurrection, and be saved? When was Peter saved, and what did He believe, that saved him, i.e., the content of faith?
Weeks, being asked this, and not a peep out of you, poser.
Peter denied the resurrection,prior to its occurrence, while for 3 years, he preached the gospel of the kingdom. Can one deny the resurrection, and be saved? When was Peter saved, and what did He believe, that saved him, i.e., the content of faith?
Weeks, being asked, and not a peep out of you, poser.
Show us Peter preaching the gospel/good news of 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV, the foundation being...
Death
Burial
Resurrection
....prior to the DBR being prophetically fulfilled.
Show us.
You won't-the DBR was hid from the 12, during the time they were preaching the gospel/good news of the kingdom.
He won't, as usual, touch this post, or confront me.....All this poser/cry baby will do, is complain on how mean I am......Wa....Wa....Wa...without once addressing the doctrinal questions, challenges to his argument.
He is a dishonest seeker, having an unteacheable spirit.
=there is only one piece of good news in the book-made up.
Explain your saint Judas-Luke 9:6 KJV
Silence.
Aren't all errors "man made?"
I apologize to Dodgeball-I initially though he was just mistaken, on his interpretive construct.
I now realize that he is just a stupid little kid, who just spams cliches, that say NADA,
So, your opinions are directly from God? You are a man, are you not? Is not what you present just the opinion of a man?
Such a kid.
Interplanner
Well-known member
dodge
New member
STP, NOPE you missed it.
The Great Commission:
16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
How do you get future tense out of those verses ? Jesus said go NOT wait ?
MAD has changed the great commission to that which is not even close to what Jesus said and taught.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
"...and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you."
So get to obeying Matt. 23:1-2, dodge.
dodge
New member
I did and I do believe the scriptures I quoted.
I would humbly ask God where and when to lead me, but I would never dismiss ANYTHING taught. Some as they are noted for Israel;however, the vast majority of Jesus' teachings are universal for direction of HIS body of believers, and you disarm yourself in the fight against Satan's temptations by ignoring or disregarding His teachings as just for Israel.
"Everything I have commanded you" as taught by Jesus and preached by the apostles are further explained by the apostles themselves.
MAD imposes distinctions on scripture to go down a road Jesus nor any apostle taught !
If you thought I was in a burning building I would hope you would assist and not walk on by thinking I had it under control.
MAD is a house built on sand and the fall of MAD will surely happen . If not in this life in the next.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
dodge
New member
When ever I can I share the gospel of Jesus you don't ?
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
Do you believe since you think Jesus was sent to JUST Israel that you do not have to obey those commands of Jesus which are universal ?
dodge
New member
That is about as far away from context as you can possibly get !
H. A. Ironside, in refuting the teachings of Bullinger, cited this passage:
If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. (1Timothy 6:3-5)
Here is Ironside's application of the passage to hyperdispensationalism:
One would almost think that this was a direct command to Timothy to beware of Bullingerism! Notice, Timothy is to withdraw himself from, that is, to have no fellowship with, those who refuse the present authority of the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. Where do you get those actual words? Certainly in the four Gospels. There are very few actual words of the Lord Jesus Christ scattered throughout the rest of the New Testament. Of course there is a sense in which all the New Testament is from Him, but the apostle is clearly referring here to the actual spoken words of our Saviour, which have been recorded for the benefit of the saints, and which set forth the teaching that is in accordance with godliness or practical piety. If a man refuses these words, whether on the plea that they do not apply to our dispensation, or for any other reason, the Spirit of God declares it is an evidence of intellectual or spiritual pride.12
Ironside is saying that when Paul warned Timothy against those who do not teach doctrine in agreement with "the words of the Lord Jesus," since those words are found in the gospels, Paul is warning against teachers like Bullinger and his hyperdispensational descendants.
Furthermore, the book of Hebrews claims that God has spoken "to us in His Son" (1:2) and claims Jesus' words were confirmed to us by the apostles: "How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will" (Hebrews 2:3, 4). That should settle the matter—Jesus' words and the words of His apostles are both considered from Jesus and binding on the church. But this does not work with hyperdispensationalists because to them the book of Hebrews is not for the church either. For example, Les Feldick will only apply Hebrews to those Jews under a different gospel than Paul preached:
Paul's writings to the Gentiles (the Church) are the thirteen books of Romans through Philemon. Although Paul also wrote the book of Hebrews, he wrote it to the Jewish believers who had been saved under the gospel of the kingdom, the teaching of the twelve apostles of the circumcision (Jews). Hebrews was not written to the Gentiles.13
So, according to that thinking, what Hebrews says about the matter can be ignored safely because it was for a different "church," and today we can safely neglect "so great a salvation" because it is no longer being offered.
To Whom Were the Gospels Written?
Another huge problem for the teaching that Jesus' words and the gospels are not for the church is that of the intended audience of the gospel writers. Take Luke for example:
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word have handed them down to us, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; (Luke 1:1-3)
Theophilus is a Greek name, not a Jewish name. If the gospels were only for the Jews, as the hyperdispensationalists claim, why was Luke writing to a Gentile? Furthermore, when was Luke written? It was written after the end of Acts, probably between 60 and 62 A.D. In his commentary on Luke, Robert Stein writes, "The earliest and latest possible dates for the writing of the Third Gospel are quite clear. The earliest would be immediately after the events of Acts 28 (i.e., after Paul's arrest and two-year stay in Rome.)"14 This means that Luke wrote to a Gentile after Paul was imprisoned as recorded in Acts 28 (if not later). So Luke was written not to the supposed "Jewish Church" that supposedly existed under a gospel different from Paul's, but to the church as it was after the supposed withdrawal of the offer of the kingdom and change of dispensations.
But why would Luke write a gospel to the church as it was after the end of Acts and apply Jesus' teachings to that church? Jesus' teachings supposedly were no longer authoritative by the time Luke wrote his gospel. Why did Luke write to Theophilus? He says this: "So that you might know the exact truth about the things you have been taught" (Luke 1:4). The gospels were given and applied to the church. The gospel writers assumed that the teachings of the head of the church, Jesus Christ, are for the church. They are not merely an historical curiosity for those who want to know what the kingdom "church" would have been like had the Jews not rejected it.
This is seen by this passage in Matthew: "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and so teaches others, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:19). Hyperdispensationalists annul Jesus' teaching for the church and think they are thereby "rightly dividing" the Bible.
Consider this passage in Mark: "And He said to them, ‘Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him; because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?' (Thus He declared all foods clean.)" (Mark 7:18, 19). Hyperdispensationalists claim that the "Jewish church" until the kingdom offer was withdrawn, was still under the law. But Mark's parenthetical clarification tells us that Jesus declared, to Jews, that all foods are clean. Despite this, hyperdispensationalist Stam says, "There is no indication of any revelation to them that the death of Christ had freed them from observance of the Mosaic law."15 So, for whom exactly was Jesus' teaching as recorded in Mark? If Jesus indeed declared all foods clean, He could not have done so for the Jews whom Stam says were still under the law even after the cross, and if He had not given this teaching through Paul, it was not binding on the church either (according to their scheme of things). So Jesus declared foods clean to no one at all. He was wasting His words.
Hyperdispensationalists tell us that until mid-Acts (or in Acts 28 depending on which one you listen to), the 12 disciples intended to set up the kingdom because they still hoped that Israel as a whole would accept the kingdom offer. They consider the law to still be in affect: "This is why [because Jesus asked the Father to forgive them] as the book of Acts opens we are still in a period of time when the dispensation of Law is in effect and God's people, Party #2, is still Israel."16 But consider what Peter said to those who were saved from their sin on the Day of Pentecost: "And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, ‘Be saved from this perverse generation!'" (Acts 2:40). Why would Peter tell these believing Jews to be saved from that perverse generation (Israel that had rejected Messiah) if Peter believed that Israel might soon accept the offer and the kingdom would be established just then? The reason believers needed to be "saved from them" was that the "perverse generation" already rejected the Messiah and His kingdom. Peter saw them as the enemies of Messiah, whom they had rejected and crucified. Luke/Acts leaves open the saving of Israel as a nation (see Acts 3:19-21). But it is clear that this will not happen until after the times of the Gentiles: "and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Luke 21:24).
The Great Commission is Rejected
Hyperdispensationalists treat the Great Commission with disdain and claim that any Christians who believe that they should seek to fulfill it are fools. Stam has an entire chapter entitled, "The So-called Great Commission." He writes, "What a mistake to call this "the great commission" and "our marching orders"! How pathetic to see sincere believers vainly trying to carry out this commission and these orders!"17 According to this thinking, taking the Great Commission in Matthew as authoritative would create "legalism."18 In this system, one error leads to another. Since Jesus' teachings are not binding on the church, then this: "teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:20) would be legalistic. It would be a legalistic sin on par with the Galatian heresy to teach the church to obey the head of the church, Jesus Christ! But the Great Commission specifically says that it is the "nations" (ethnos) to which the disciples were sent to disciple, baptize and teach. Stam claims that this commission was only to be applied by the disciples in Israel at Jerusalem and included the idea of "baptismal salvation."19 Since they do not believe that water baptism is for Christians, they detach the Great Commission from the church, claim that Peter preached baptismal salvation because of Acts 2:38, and thus create two different gospels, the one Peter was commissioned to preach and a different one that no one knew about until Paul.
But doesn't Jesus promise "I am with you even unto the end of the age"? No problem for hyperdispensationalists: "Neither does the promise ‘Lo, I am with you even unto the end of the age,' present any difficulty for, remember, this present dispensation is a parenthetical period of grace with was then still a secret ‘hid in God' (Eph. 3:9)." So we are safely rid of Jesus' teachings, baptism, the need to go to the nations, and for good measure we are rid of "repentance for forgiveness of sins" (Luke 24:47) because, wouldn't you know it, that is "only for the Jews." Feldick says: "And yet for most people who are putting out the plan of salvation they say, ‘You have to ask God to forgive you of your sins, you have to repent.' Well I can't find any of this in Paul's letter [sic] to the Church Age believers. It's not in here."20 For Feldick, if Paul did not teach it somewhere between Romans and Philemon, it is not for us and not part of the gospel. Never mind that Paul commended the Thessalonians for turning from idols to serve the living God (1Thessalonians 1:9), which surely sounds like repentance. Shortly I will show from Acts that Paul taught repentance—including changing one's behavior—and taught it to Gentiles.
http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue108.htm
That is all the kid has-commentaries, about commentaries.....opinions, about opinions, about other opinions...........as he studies what others say the book teaches, or should teach, and when we connect the dots, disputing/persuading, per Paul, from the book, he goes into his "MAD is the worst thing since Mr. Microphone......Wha....Wha...Wha....," cries/fallback, emotional blathering/muttering, and stomps his feet, never, on his own, addressing challenges to his assertions, interpretive method, or his doctrinal assertions.
Poor kid.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:chuckle:
Nice commentary.
Matthew 10:23 (KJV)
Read it again.
Nice commentary.
Matthew 10:23 (KJV)
Read it again.
Ironside proven clueless by O'Hair...
https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/bullingerism-or-ultradispensationalism/
http://www.doctrine.org/ohair/ACCUSER OF THE BRETHREN.pdf
And by Havard...
https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/are-we-hyper-dispensationalists
https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/bullingerism-or-ultradispensationalism/
http://www.doctrine.org/ohair/ACCUSER OF THE BRETHREN.pdf
And by Havard...
https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/are-we-hyper-dispensationalists
Spoiler
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Rat, rat, rat, rat, rat!!!!