For Sincere Inquisitors ONLY: MAD Explained

[chickenman]

No, no, no...please, let's keep this for "sincere inquirers" only. The OP is clear.

 

[Nick M]

This is also why I pick KJV first, even though I quote NKJV often.

2 Corinthians 5:9-11

9Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

11Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.

NKJV

9 Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. 11 Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are well known to God, and I also trust are well known in your consciences.

Two things. Good things done in the body of Christ, as KJV sort of makes it sound, or reward and punishment on us. Knowing the terror of the Lord doesn't sound like it is meant for those in verse 11 of KJV.

I don't think this is any different than judgement in Revelation from the Lambs book of life. Where there will be terror.

:chicken:man, The Graphite, STP?

 

[chickenman]

I've never thought about it, Nick. I'll check it out today and come back later.
Thanks!
Randy

 

[Nick M]

I think it was Rabbi Tet the other day that said it. He said he is OSAS, then turns around and adds more judgement.

I don't agree, based on KJV. "Knowing the terror of the lord, we persuade men. But we are made manifest unto God".

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I think it's the judgment seat of Christ, Nick.

Those who do not study to shew themselves approved, by rightly dividing the word of truth, their work will not be accepted and they will be ashamed and suffer loss. Can't rightly divide the word of truth if you don't know what the word of truth is. It's the gospel of your salvation. The gospel of our salvation has to separated out from the gospel of the salvation of others.

 

[Butterfly]

I think it was Rabbi Tet the other day that said it. He said he is OSAS, then turns around and adds more judgement.

Tet flips and flops every 10 seconds. He said he was OSAS and then contradicts himself and states that he is not OSAS. They guy is a confused polemic. All he has been doing is attacking those who believe in the Rapture, those who are premillennial, mid-acts, dispensational, literalistic, etc.

 

[tetelestai]

Tet flips and flops every 10 seconds. He said he was OSAS and then contradicts himself and states that he is not OSAS. They guy is a confused polemic. All he has been doing is attacking those who believe in the Rapture, those who are premillennial, mid-acts, dispensational, literalistic, etc.

How is quoting me out of context keep in the theme of this thread?

Thought this was supposed to be for serious inquisitors only?

I never said I was not OSAS

I am pro-OSAS, and believe in the Bema Seat.

The Bema Seat of Christ is different than the Great White Throne Judgment

If you guys weren’t so dense, you would figure out that believing in the Beam Seat is in itself proof that OSAS is true.

It’s the anti-OSAS crowd that believes the Beam and Great White Throne Judgment are the same thing.

Only believers are called to be judged at the Bema Seat, thus OSAS.

 

[godrulz]

I am at least as 'sincere' as tet and he is staying/playing. If I could make one comment before I buzz off again: the above does not make sense (non sequitur). Most Acts 2 dispy believe Bema for believers is in heaven during Trib. on earth and GWT is after the Millennium mostly for unbelievers (and some dead mill. believers). Many of us are also not OSAS. There is no logical connection between Bema and OSAS.

Thx for this freebie post...back to my cave.:cheers:

 

[Pam Baldwin]

This is also why I pick KJV first, even though I quote NKJV often.

2 Corinthians 5:9-11

9Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

11Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.

NKJV

9 Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. 11 Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are well known to God, and I also trust are well known in your consciences.

Two things. Good things done in the body of Christ, as KJV sort of makes it sound, or reward and punishment on us. Knowing the terror of the Lord doesn't sound like it is meant for those in verse 11 of KJV.

I don't think this is any different than judgement in Revelation from the Lambs book of life. Where there will be terror.

:chicken:man, The Graphite, STP?

:wave: Hi Nick M...I've been way for quite awhile. I know I've missed quite a bit, so I hope that I'm not jumping in and repeating something.
But here's my take on this question you've raised:

v9 We labour to be well-pleasing to God.

v10 We( Body saints) will appear before the Bema Seat (NOT the GWT). We receive our rewards here--notice that there is no mention of punishments). 1 Cor 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.


v11 We know the terror of the Lord.....we tell people of it and their responsibity and need for salvation....but WE are not going to be recipients of that wrath! "we are made manifest to God" etc down to v21 "...we might be made the righteousness of God in him."

Pam :upright:

 

[Pam Baldwin]

How is quoting me out of context keep in the theme of this thread?

Thought this was supposed to be for serious inquisitors only?

I never said I was not OSAS

I am pro-OSAS, and believe in the Bema Seat.

The Bema Seat of Christ is different than the Great White Throne Judgment

If you guys weren’t so dense, you would figure out that believing in the Beam Seat is in itself proof that OSAS is true.

It’s the anti-OSAS crowd that believes the Beam and Great White Throne Judgment are the same thing.

Only believers are called to be judged at the Bema Seat, thus OSAS.

Hey tetelestai! :wave:

Yep, I don't think that one can believe in both the bema and GWT unless one is OSAS...unless of course, they are dense :dunce:...or, giving the benefit of the doubt, just ill-informed :confused;

 

[Pam Baldwin]

I think it's the judgment seat of Christ, Nick.

Those who do not study to shew themselves approved, by rightly dividing the word of truth, their work will not be accepted and they will be ashamed and suffer loss. Can't rightly divide the word of truth if you don't know what the word of truth is. It's the gospel of your salvation. The gospel of our salvation has to separated out from the gospel of the salvation of others.

I'm baaaack! But don't know for how long this time...

I see that no one has listened to me say for the zillionth time:

2 tim 2:15 may be translated "rightly DIVIDE", but there is no word "division" in there.....( the KJV missed it there )
The word there is the word we get "orthopedics" from- orthotomeo- : to cut straight, hold a straight course,to doing right, to teach the truth directly and correctly. So we are to "cut" it straight, and to walk uprightly according to that which we've learned.

Pam :upright:

 

[godrulz]

I'm baaaack! But don't know for how long this time...

I see that no one has listened to me say for the zillionth time:

2 tim 2:15 may be translated "rightly DIVIDE", but there is no word "division" in there.....( the KJV missed it there )
The word there is the word we get "orthopedics" from- orthotomeo- : to cut straight, hold a straight course,to doing right, to teach the truth directly and correctly. So we are to "cut" it straight, and to walk uprightly according to that which we've learned.

Pam :upright:

This is nothing to do with accepting hyper-division/hyper-dispensational views (ultra).

 

[Pam Baldwin]

This is nothing to do with accepting hyper-division/hyper-dispensational views (ultra).

Maybe not directly, but I am saying that I don't think I am "dividing" any Scriptures into dispensations . The Scriptures all work together, all dispensations work together. They are different, yes, but not divided.

The Body's Hope is to rule the created order.
The Kingdom Hope is to rule the earth.
The Gentile Hope is to maintain the earth.

They are all needed to make it all work together.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

Hi Chickenman!:wave: How have you been?
I was reading an earlier post that you did , but now I can't find it....so I'm going to ask without using the post. Hopefully, my memory will work well enough for you to understand....

You were commenting on the giving of the kingdom from the (reprobate) pharisees to the "little flock".
You used Luke 12:32. How do you get that Jesus was talking of taking the kingdom (rule/authority) from those and giving it to the apostles? It seemed to me that that passage was just saying to the flock that they will inherit the kingdom...no mention of passing of authority. (However I do agree that the 12 will sit on their 12 thrones ruling)

I probably butchered that post and my question.....if you could remember the post, maybe I can explain my question better.

Thanks!

 

[chickenman]

Been perusing this thread again and would like to revive it.

Pam, I see you have an unanswered question. I'll get to it today, and I'm sorry for missing it.

All,
Please read the OP before posting. We have the support of Knight to keep this a thread for non-debate purposes. So let's keep it alive for that reason, please.

Back later.

Randy

 

[chickenman]

Hi Chickenman!:wave: How have you been?
I was reading an earlier post that you did , but now I can't find it....so I'm going to ask without using the post. Hopefully, my memory will work well enough for you to understand....

You were commenting on the giving of the kingdom from the (reprobate) pharisees to the "little flock".
You used Luke 12:32. How do you get that Jesus was talking of taking the kingdom (rule/authority) from those and giving it to the apostles? It seemed to me that that passage was just saying to the flock that they will inherit the kingdom...no mention of passing of authority. (However I do agree that the 12 will sit on their 12 thrones ruling)

I probably butchered that post and my question.....if you could remember the post, maybe I can explain my question better.

Thanks!

Hi, Pam.
Look at post #612 and see if this addresses your question.

Thanks!

Randy

 

[chickenman]

Here's the OP, as a refresher on the point of the thread...

GO AWAY
Let me start by asking that troublemakers and opposers who are already convinced of themselves please refrain from posting in this thread. I would appreciate it if people like godrulz, andyc, cistercian, and others with similar agendas stay away. I'll respectfully ask that the moderator(s) delete any posts by these people, as well as others that inappropriately challenge others and/or that simply want to oppose for the sake of opposing. godrulz et al, if you post I'll ignore it but report it, asking it to be deleted. Of course, I can't make forum rules, so I'm only expressing my desire.


COME ON IN
Several people have expressed a sincere desire to learn more about MidActs Dispensationalism. Whether or not those people ultimately conclude the same is irrelevant. They are sincere inquisitors.

This thread is for those people to ask questions. And they're absolutely welcome to offer challenges, as well. Sincere, open, non-compative people like Town Heretic, bodhigirsmiles, and bybee...this thread is for you to help you understand the MidActs position.



ON THE BIBLE
I'll kick it off by stating that MidActs Dispensationalism is an approach to reading and studying the Bible. Those of us who hold to this approach believe that we must read and study the Bible FORWARD, rather than BACKWARD. By this, I mean that we must understand what comes before Exodus before we can understand Exodus. We must understand "Old Testament" prophecy before we can understand Matthew. We must understand those things before we can understand what's going on in Acts. We believe that it is highly dangerous (to a doctrinal position that one formulates) for a person to read BACKWARD, meaning that he/she interprets an epistle, for instance, and then forces the things written previously to mean the same thing. We also believe it is dangerous to evaluate a book, chapter, or verse in and of itself. A verse HAS TO BE read and studied within the context of a book/epistle. That book/epistle HAS TO BE read and studied within the context of the commission of the human author (in the case of the epistles). And a book HAS TO BE read and studied through a biblical theology that first considers prophecy and God's stated plans.

If one labors over a verse or chapter but does not understand God's covenants, prophecy, and dispensed commissions, then the doctrine based on those verses will at best be accidentally correct and at worst downright heretical.

We also believe that we must take God's Word literally, unless the text demands that we don't. For example, when John sees a vision of a woman on a scarlet beast in Rev. 17, we can understand that in the future when his vision plays out, it won't actually involve a literal woman riding a literal scarlet beast, for the text defines what those two things represent. We gladly accept figurative language when the text demands it.

And we believe that God's Word is what is inspired, so we must rely in it, rather than relying on scholar's varying opinions on history, culture, or even the underlying Greek/Hebrew text. Scholarly opinions will always differ from one another, but God's Word will always remain steadfast. So we rest on it as our ONLY authority.



THE BASICS



Where it all starts:

• God called out a chosen nation to be His special people above all the nations of the earth.
• The nation continually rebelled against God, to the point that they even rejected His Son Jesus Christ Who physically came to earth to get them to repent and turn to God.
• For one year after Jesus' earthly ministry, God gave them repeated chances to accept the good news of His Son and the coming kingdom and to bear fruit.
• Because the masses still rejected Him, God put a halt to the prophesied timeline of delivering the kingdom to them. He relegated the chosen nation to the status of the disobedient Gentile nations, thus putting ALL people in the same boat (as opposed to Israel being the preeminent nation).
• Upon doing so, God called out Paul to be the "apostle to the Gentiles", delivering the "gospel of the uncircumcision" - a message that was different in many ways from that which was previously delivered by those apostles that Jesus chose during His earthly ministry.
• Jesus Christ from heaven dispensed to Paul a gospel message that was specifically pertinent to the Body of Christ, whereas He had previously from earth dispensed a gospel message to the Twelve that was specifically pertinent to the chosen nation of Israel who awaited their coming tribulation and promised kingdom.
• These two messages were different. The book of Acts shows the transition away from one to the other and displays the resulting confusion…a confusion which, by the way, still exists today and for pretty much the same reason as back then.

How's that for starters?

I'd love to address any questions and expand on any points. Others who hold the same or similar positions (STP, voltaire, JohnW, Knight, Delmar, Nick, judging u, etc.) are absolutely welcome to chime in whenever you want. I'm perfectly happy shutting up and letting people smarter than me answer questions, if that's what it takes to help others truly understand the MidActs position. If I don't know something, I'll say I don't know. But I'd love to help those who are sincerely interested to understand more about our position.

Thanks,
Randy

 

[Nick M]

v9 We labour to be well-pleasing to God.

v10 We( Body saints) will appear before the Bema Seat (NOT the GWT). We receive our rewards here--notice that there is no mention of punishments). 1 Cor 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.


v11 We know the terror of the Lord.....we tell people of it and their responsibity and need for salvation....but WE are not going to be recipients of that wrath! "we are made manifest to God" etc down to v21 "...we might be made the righteousness of God in him."

Pam :upright:

godrulz always cries for context, but never offers it. Thanks for putting in a real effort. In the context, he says the terror of the Lord and to warn others. That can only be one thing. You can't say there is no punishment when the very next verse says there is wrath. But we can discuss it elsewhere, less Randy lose a few feathers.

 

[rainee]

COME ON IN
Several people have expressed a sincere desire to learn more about MidActs Dispensationalism. Whether or not those people ultimately conclude the same is irrelevant. They are sincere inquisitors.

Hi Mr Chickenman,

You know I appreciate seeing this thread, I never heard of MAD in my life till coming here, did you know that?
(Well, no, how could you?)
But I believe I would like to be an inquisitor, so I hope to read this when I have a chance.
thank you,
rainee

 

[chickenman]

Great to have you here, rainee.

As I've said numerous times, I'm not interested in working to persuade anyone. My goal with this thread wasn't to do that. It was merely to inform those who are sincerely interested in understanding the position. If you ultimately conclude differently than me, but you're not a turd about it, then you're okay by me! :up:

Thanks for joining in. Start at the beginning, as that's where the foundation is laid. Fire away with any questions you have. I'm happy to take a shot at them if I can.

Randy