For Sincere Inquisitors ONLY: MAD Explained

[chickenman]

Well, that is where the confusion comes from for me. In working through the word "dispensation", I only find it used in the KJV. Other versions use different wording. So when I look at the meaning of the word dispensation in Strong's it does not square with the way we use the word today. The context within the KJV where the word is used tends to support a stewardship meaing of the word, not a dispensing.

I see what you mean. Well, maybe this will help, then. I don't call myself a "dispensationalist" because of Eph. 3 or through any kind of study of what "Οικονομια/s" means. I call myself a "dispensationalist" because I see very clearly that God has dispensed different things at different times throughout history (and will in the future, as well). Obviously, I didn't come up with the word one day; I borrowed it from others. But it makes sense for me to apply the word to my belief system in that regard, because again, God has dispensed different things at different times.

So I like "dispensationalism" and "dispensationalist" for that reason. And for that reason, you and every single Christian in the world is a dispensationalist, since all recognize that eating catfish was acceptable, then wasn't, then was (for example).

Within that belief system (Dispensationalism), then we can further clarify for convenience. So while there's no such phrase as "Pauline Dispensationalist" in scripture, it is simply used for convenience to point out that someone who recognizes dispensations in scripture also recognizes that one was given to Paul. And the tighter label, "MidActs Dispensationalist", is simply used to conveniently and quickly point out a recognition of a dispensation being given in "mid-acts".


And by the way, I did a quick search after reading your post and found that other versions do use the word. NKJV, ASV, YLT, e.g.. This doesn't matter to me, but I thought you'd want to know.

In short, Paul was entrusted with a task, he was put in charge of something that was already given to us by Jesus - the gospel. Nothing new was dispensed to Paul, Paul was put in charge taking the gospel to the gentiles.

I obviously disagree. In case you didn't know.

Thanks for taking the time to answer. I am trying to get a handle on dispensationalism and part of that is trying to understand where the idea came from. I am having a little trouble reconciling Strong's with the idea of dispensing something new.

For the record, I believe that God deals with people in Covenants. God may dispense things within a covenant but if He does it is always consistent with the covenant. Hence, to me, MAD may accurately describe a period of time within the New Covenant but MAD is not a new gospel or even anything new. God was dissatisfied with how the Jews were not spreading the gospel as He intended so He expanded His delivery method, if you will.

Sorry, rambling a bit.

No problem. This thread will be a good place for you to ask questions. The hope of this thread is that readers will have something to chew on. If you or any others decide you can't accept the premise, then that's fine. No one will try to persuade you (in this thread, at least :chuckle.

Be good.

Randy

 

[CabinetMaker]

I see what you mean. Well, maybe this will help, then. I don't call myself a "dispensationalist" because of Eph. 3 or through any kind of study of what "Οικονομια/s" means. I call myself a "dispensationalist" because I see very clearly that God has dispensed different things at different times throughout history (and will in the future, as well). Obviously, I didn't come up with the word one day; I borrowed it from others. But it makes sense for me to apply the word to my belief system in that regard, because again, God has dispensed different things at different times.

So I like "dispensationalism" and "dispensationalist" for that reason. And for that reason, you and every single Christian in the world is a dispensationalist, since all recognize that eating catfish was acceptable, then wasn't, then was (for example).

Within that belief system (Dispensationalism), then we can further clarify for convenience. So while there's no such phrase as "Pauline Dispensationalist" in scripture, it is simply used for convenience to point out that someone who recognizes dispensations in scripture also recognizes that one was given to Paul. And the tighter label, "MidActs Dispensationalist", is simply used to conveniently and quickly point out a recognition of a dispensation being given in "mid-acts".

Okay. I can agree with that. The bible is fairly clear that God deals with His creation differently at different times. A dispensation is as good a name as any.

And by the way, I did a quick search after reading your post and found that other versions do use the word. NKJV, ASV, YLT, e.g.. This doesn't matter to me, but I thought you'd want to know.

That's true. Sorry.

I obviously disagree. In case you didn't know.

We will probably continue to disagree but I would never doubt your salvation based on a disagreement over terms. At least that is how I see it. We look at how the Gospel is dispensed from different points of view but I am reasonably sure that we agree on what the Gospel is.

No problem. This thread will be a good place for you to ask questions. The hope of this thread is that readers will have something to chew on. If you or any others decide you can't accept the premise, then that's fine. No one will try to persuade you (in this thread, at least :chuckle.

Be good.

Randy

I may have more questions as we go along. Probably generated from discussions on other threads!

 

[Lighthouse]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the dispensation of grace (through Paul) begin after the cross?

God applied it retroactively. He can do that, He's God.

In reading through the beginnings of this thread, it seemed to me that MAD was being used as a reason to interpret certain words of Jesus as pertaining to the Jews and not the Gentiles. If Jesus came to save the Jews, at which point did he switch over so that he could die for the Gentiles as well? Or was he simply dying for the future Gentiles in some way? :think:

Jesus came to die for all of us. That was the way it always was. That never changed.

He came to bring in the Israelites so they could spread the gospel to the rest of the world. The Gentiles to whom He preached were desperate to hear from Him and believed He was Messiah.

Jesus, Himself, Said He only came for the lost sheep of the House of Israel.

But He answered and said, [Jesus]“I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”[/Jesus]
-Matthew 15:24

 

[Pam Baldwin]

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

Thanks!

Randy

Thanks! I read it, and it does help me get what you are saying. Been studying "church polity' a lot lately (and that's an understatement!). The part about the Pharisees and Sadducces will help me in my studies....

Pam

 

[Pam Baldwin]

Wanted to re-post one of STP's great contributions to this thread...

:thumb: Wow. It really is a great post STP! You have a knack for "teaching".

 

[Zeke]

Wanted to re-post one of STP's great contributions to this thread...

STP posts on the Abrahamic promise is right in line with Acts 26:22, I agree it was all prophetic.

Grace, Zeke.

 

[zippy2006]

Hi, zippy.
John and Nick have tackled your questions up to here, I see. I'll let Nick address this post, since it was a response to him. But I would like to clarify something that you wrote.

The scriptures foretold of Israelites AND Gentiles being saved. Gentile salvation wasn't hidden. It's just that, according to prophecy, Gentiles would essentially have to become Israelites (proselytes) in order to receive the inheritance promised to Israel (land, kingdom, New Covenant). See Is. 56, for example.

But it was never foretold that a Gentile could be saved APART from Israel, outside of the covenants of Israel. Therefore, according to prophecy ONLY God-fearing Gentiles, those aligned with Israel, would receive the promises to Israel (salvation). Whereas the mystery (or...one of the mysteries) eventually revealed to Paul was that even Gentiles who were outside of the commonwealth of Israel (no alignment with Israel at all) could be saved, as well. Completely independent and apart from Israel.

I'll let Nick address the rest, if he wants, since you had questions for him. I just wanted to clarify about those Gentiles. Let me know if I didn't.

Thanks,
Randy

Thanks makes a lot of sense

I really want to delve into MAD a bit and try to understand some of it, but school may keep me busy for awhile. This post has been very helpful overall though :e4e:

 

[Nick M]

So in essence, Jesus Christ died for all people, but the fact that he was dying for Gentiles too was hidden at the time of the crucifixion. The great commission would have extended the dispensation of grace to the Gentiles if the Jews had been repentant. Is this right?

CM pointed out, and I don't know if I said it, but he died for the heathen that did not bless Israel. You can not trace back through scripture where that is declared. I want to harp on this for a second, by things Christ said and did. This really blows holes in false prophets and demons that say there is no dispensation of grace, no changes, and gentiles always had God. No, they didn't. They had to bless Israel.

Genesis 22

18 In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.”

Genesis 26

4 And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed;

Genesis 28

14 Also your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread abroad to the west and the east, to the north and the south; and in you and in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.

Those who are not the seed of Abraham, approach God by first blessing his seed, because Abraham obeyed God in the flesh. He offered up his son Isaac to God when you know he didn't want to.

This did not change when Jesus came. The ceturion servants story is mentioned I think twice, but the full story is in Luke. After Jesus is told he is worthy because he blessed Israel by builiding a synagogue, then Jesus helped him.

Luke 7

1 Now when He concluded all His sayings in the hearing of the people, He entered Capernaum.

2 And a certain centurion’s servant, who was dear to him, was sick and ready to die.
3 So when he heard about Jesus, he sent elders of the Jews to Him, pleading with Him to come and heal his servant.

4 And when they came to Jesus, they begged Him earnestly, saying that the one for whom He should do this was deserving,

5 “for he loves our nation, and has built us a synagogue.”

6 Then Jesus went with them.

Matthew 15

21 Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the region of Tyre and Sidon.

22 And behold, a woman of Canaan came from that region and cried out to Him, saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is severely demon-possessed.”

23 But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, “Send her away, for she cries out after us.”

24 But He answered and said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

25 Then she came and worshiped Him, saying, “Lord, help me!”

26 But He answered and said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.”

27 And she said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.”

28 Then Jesus answered and said to her, “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be to you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

And suprisingly, many people miss the obvious. She blessed Israel by putting herself under them as a dog. Then Jesus healed her daughter. The athiests all know this. They think Jesus is the biggest jerk in history and like to point out he called her a dog. Yet Christains pretend like these things didn't happen.

After Pentecost, Peter repeats the message.

Acts 3

22 For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you.

23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’

24 Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days.

25 You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.

Now, go ask a "Pentecostal" to prootext salvation, or where Jesus said not to keep the law. They accuse us of arguing from silence, which makes no sense, we argue from the scripture. They argue from silence. Jesus said to keep and observe all that the pharisee says to keep and observe. When the Holy Spirit controlled Peter at Pentecost, he never said you are dead to sin and alive to Christ. He repeated what Jesus taught in his earthly ministry. Which is the law. Repent of sins, confess, water baptism as a ceremonial cleansing. We don't get a water baptism, because we are in Christ, and have no sin.

Since there is not a proof text[of the Body of Christ at Pentecost]

But there is a proof text to it begining at Acts 9, which is original name for those of us who believe the Body began with Paul.

Paul said he is the first sinner saved, and the example for a saved sinner.

Romans 11

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry,

14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them.

15 For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

I just put this up for the 6th or 7th time in a catholic thread for them to answer, and they avoid it like the bubonic plague. Israel is cast away, and gentiles are now saved by it. Unlike before, wheren gentiles had to bless Israel.

 

[Nick M]

Thanks makes a lot of sense

I really want to delve into MAD a bit and try to understand some of it, but school may keep me busy for awhile. This post has been very helpful overall though :e4e:

You only need to delve into the Bible itself.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

"Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more(my emphasis)." 2 Cor. 5:16

We are not saved by the Lord Jesus Christ's earthly ministry; we are saved by 1 Cor. 15:1-4. Paul, our apostle, tells us, in no uncertain terms, that we are not to know our Saviour any longer, in this dispensation, in His earthly ministry. We can learn(Romans 15:4) from the "4 gospels"- Matthew:the Lord Jesus Christ presented as King; Mark:Servant(and notice no geneology given in Mark-not relevant for servants); Luke: Man; John: God- as they have many beautiful intra-dispensational spiritual applications/truths. However, the body of Christ's doctrine in this age is contained in Romans-Philemon. Remove Romans-Philemon and you have no Christianity-you have Jews under the law.

Contrary to what "Joe Blow pastor/teacher/theologian with 15 titles before and after his/her name" has "spoon-fed" most(children need spoon-feeding, as opposed to adults-"milk" vs. "meat"-2 Cor. 3:2) to accept, much of Matthew-John is "Old Testament"(read Hebrews 9:16,17) "law-ground", with the Jews living under the law, not Christians under grace, who have been freed from the burdensome demands of the law(Romans 6:14,15). As an aside, did you know that the era we commonly refer to as "The Old Testament", "The Old Covenant", did not begin at Genesis 1:1, but at Exodus 20:4?(per Hebrews 9:22)

The "gospels" were not written to teach Christianity, but to reveal the Lord Jesus Christ in the different aspects of His person and work as Israel's Messiah, Jehovah's servant, Son of Man, and Son of God, no book being complete in itself. We must not "down play" the Lord Jesus Christ's earthly ministry-"God forbid"(Romans 3:4 and others). However, the foundation of our faith rests upon our risen, ascended, glorified, and coming Lord Jesus Christ.

We are not now, in this dispensation, to know our great Saviour as "Jesus"(a very "common" name during His times), his name of humiliation. NO, we are to recognize him, know Him, love Him, and worship Him as the risen, ascended, and glorified Lord Jesus Christ, and not as some "sweet little baby lying in the manger", who is no threat there, nor as merely a wise, itinerant teacher/preacher traveling in Israel, who is no threat there either. This is the point Paul was driving home in Philippians 2:5-11, i.e., one day soon, this same "Jesus", the one who suffered for us all, and endured the humiliation of a servant when he humbled himself in His earthly ministry and in the death of the cross, the one who was "...despised and rejected of men...."(Isaiah 53:3), the one who was thought to be "out of his mind" by even his friends(Mk. 3:21), will be acknowledged(whether willingly, or by force, I know not), not in this former state/reputation/office as just the rejected and non-threatening "Jesus", but as the risen, ascended, and glorified LORD JESUS CHRIST(and I am shouting this, and one day soon everyone, without exception, will).

We need to ask each and every believer:Are you "following Jesus", or are you a believer in and on the Lord Jesus Christ, our living "...Lord from heaven..."(1 Cor. 15:47), who "...died for our sins according to the scriptures.... was buried.....and.... rose again the third day according to the scriptures..."(1 Cor. 15: 3,4), and who now reigns in glory in heaven, and is coming again in glory?

We are to worship Him as Colossians 1:16, acknowledge Him as Colossians 1:18("the head of the Body"), praise Him for Colossians 2:10, and! pray to Him as Colossians 2:19.

And remember, the Lord Jesus Christ is not the "King of the Church"; for if He was, we would be subjects, not "joint- heirs"(Romans 8:17)!

I find it quite telling that many believers, those who were bought with a tremendous price(1 Cor. 6:20, 7:23), refer to each other as saints, and rightly so, but only because what was done by this "... the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ..."(Titus 2:13), this "...man of war..."(Exodus 15:3). And yet, we do not accord this same honour to our "Wonderful"(Isaiah 9:6) Saviour of ours, the only Saviour, who accomplished this miracle on our behalf, who made each one of us a "new creature in Christ Jesus"(2 Cor. 5:17, Galatians 6:15). Even those who followed "Jesus" in His earthly ministry, those who were "followers of Jesus", never called Him "Jesus", never exhibited such disrespect as to call Him by such a familiar name ("check it out" per Acts 17:11-"Master", yes; "Jesus", no). They honoured His person and His office. Only his enemies referred to Him as "Jesus." This is a great object lesson the LORD God would have each of us to realize, and the apostle Paul, "...the apostle of the Gentiles..."(Romans 11:13), and thus our/your apostle, not Peter, "raises the bar" with the revelation of the mystery.

How much more so those such as us, given our former miserable condition, given what we once were, "...-without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world..."(Eph. 2:12), as compared to what we have "in Christ" as a present possession, as revealed to Paul by this same risen, ascended, and glorified Lord Jesus Christ from ! heaven!

No, I no longer, as a new creature in Christ Jesus, know "Jesus". I know, acknowledge, love, serve, thank, and worship not a crucified man still hanging on the cross as a victim(being a former Roman Catholic), but a victorious "...the God of the living..."(Mk. 12:27)-a living, resurrected, ascended, and glorified LORD JESUS CHRIST! I pray each one of us will now shout the following within our hearts, and give Him His due honour, as it is written:

"Sing forth the honour of his name(my emphasis): make his praise glorious." Psalms 66:2


For, eventually:

"Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name(my emphasis): That at the name of Jesus(my emphasis) every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord(my emphasis), to the glory of God the Father." Philippians 2:9-11

I also pray that all of us that "....have the mind of Christ...."(1 Cor. 2:16) would "...think on these things"(Philippians 4:8).

"For we preach(emphasis mine) not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord(emphasis mine); and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake." 2 Cor. 4:5

:BRAVO: In complete agreement, john w.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

Cabinet Maker: In short, Paul was entrusted with a task, he was put in charge of something that was already given to us by Jesus - the gospel. Nothing new was dispensed to Paul, Paul was put in charge taking the gospel to the gentiles.


I obviously disagree. In case you didn't know.


Randy

Hi Randy:

Am I hearing you correctly? Are you saying that the gospel given to Paul was the not a new gospel? I must be hearing you wrong.....

"dispensation" is the management of (household) affairs. It's the dispensing of those laws/rules/management. Paul was the steward of this new dispensation: the Body....the household laws/rules/. There are three dispensations: Jew, Gentile and Body. All three have different household rules/laws/ and are managed accordingly.

Pam

 

[chickenman]

Hi Randy:

Am I hearing you correctly? Are you saying that the gospel given to Paul was the not a new gospel? I must be hearing you wrong.....

"dispensation" is the management of (household) affairs. It's the dispensing of those laws/rules/management. Paul was the steward of this new dispensation: the Body....the household laws/rules/. There are three dispensations: Jew, Gentile and Body. All three have different household rules/laws/ and are managed accordingly.

Pam

Hi, Pam.
Yes, you're misunderstanding. And I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is coming from. I was disagreeing with CabinetMaker. Paul was given something that was new, in that it had never before been revealed. Jesus didn't preach it in His earthly ministry. Neither did the Twelve (except that they did preach the good news that God had sent Jesus in fulfillment of the prophecy the seed of David, as Paul preached as well).

I agree with you, Pam. What did I post that suggested otherwise?

Thanks! Good to see you around!

Randy

 

[Nick M]

You showed cabinetmakers point of view in contrast to yours. And didn't use a quote tag. Maybe you need a tricycle like John W.

 

[chickenman]

:zoomin:-------

 

[Pam Baldwin]

Hi, Pam.
Yes, you're misunderstanding. And I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is coming from. I was disagreeing with CabinetMaker. Paul was given something that was new, in that it had never before been revealed. Jesus didn't preach it in His earthly ministry. Neither did the Twelve (except that they did preach the good news that God had sent Jesus in fulfillment of the prophecy the seed of David, as Paul preached as well).

I agree with you, Pam. What did I post that suggested otherwise?

Thanks! Good to see you around!

Randy

Sorry Randy- I have no idea how I read that wrong!! I've been eliminating some things out of my life because I've been too busy and stressed....but the burden won't let up til the middle of May....:think:maybe I should just read the posts until then.

 

[Zeke]

Hi, Pam.
Yes, you're misunderstanding. And I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is coming from. I was disagreeing with CabinetMaker. Paul was given something that was new, in that it had never before been revealed. Jesus didn't preach it in His earthly ministry. Neither did the Twelve (except that they did preach the good news that God had sent Jesus in fulfillment of the prophecy the seed of David, as Paul preached as well).

I agree with you, Pam. What did I post that suggested otherwise?

Thanks! Good to see you around!

Randy

I do think he presented the principles being taught after the cross by Paul, Matthew 23:23, 1Timothy 1:13-16, Luke 4:18-19, Acts 26:18, Luke 6:27-36, Romans 5:10.
Christ taught under the demands of the law, but also showed that Gods type of Love, grace, and mercy could desolve those demands.
Same thing as 1Cor 12:31.
Granted the sacrifical love God came to fulfill was hidden until after the fact, but we can detect it in the teachings of Christ before his death on the cross.

Grace, Zeke.

 

[chickenman]

Hi, Zeke! :wave2:

Yes, I agree that many principles are consistent, which would mean that we can draw application from many non-Pauline areas of scripture. I was referring specifically to the mystery that was kept hidden from the foundation of the world. We can find many, many principles that are consistent from Genesis through Revelation. But as you know well, the mystery of the gospel of the grace of God wasn't revealed until Paul.

Thanks for chiming in and clarifying that.

Randy

 

[zippy2006]

CM pointed out, and I don't know if I said it, but he died for the heathen that did not bless Israel. You can not trace back through scripture where that is declared. I want to harp on this for a second, by things Christ said and did. This really blows holes in false prophets and demons that say there is no dispensation of grace, no changes, and gentiles always had God. No, they didn't. They had to bless Israel.

I don't understand the difference really though. Most Christians say that Christ brought the Gentiles to God, but you say that Paul did, right?

Genesis 22

18 In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.”

Genesis 26

4 And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed;

Genesis 28

14 Also your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread abroad to the west and the east, to the north and the south; and in you and in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.

Does any of this contradict the traditional view?

Those who are not the seed of Abraham, approach God by first blessing his seed, because Abraham obeyed God in the flesh. He offered up his son Isaac to God when you know he didn't want to.

This did not change when Jesus came. The ceturion servants story is mentioned I think twice, but the full story is in Luke. After Jesus is told he is worthy because he blessed Israel by builiding a synagogue, then Jesus helped him.

Luke 7

1 Now when He concluded all His sayings in the hearing of the people, He entered Capernaum.

2 And a certain centurion’s servant, who was dear to him, was sick and ready to die.
3 So when he heard about Jesus, he sent elders of the Jews to Him, pleading with Him to come and heal his servant.

4 And when they came to Jesus, they begged Him earnestly, saying that the one for whom He should do this was deserving,

5 “for he loves our nation, and has built us a synagogue.”

6 Then Jesus went with them.

So you are saying that Jesus only helped because they laid themselves below Israel?

Matthew 15

21 Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the region of Tyre and Sidon.

22 And behold, a woman of Canaan came from that region and cried out to Him, saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is severely demon-possessed.”

23 But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, “Send her away, for she cries out after us.”

24 But He answered and said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

25 Then she came and worshiped Him, saying, “Lord, help me!”

26 But He answered and said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.”

27 And she said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.”

28 Then Jesus answered and said to her, “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be to you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

And suprisingly, many people miss the obvious. She blessed Israel by putting herself under them as a dog. Then Jesus healed her daughter. The athiests all know this. They think Jesus is the biggest jerk in history and like to point out he called her a dog. Yet Christains pretend like these things didn't happen.

This has always interested me. I find my friend's explanation equally plausible:

The story of the Canaanite woman is a challenge, that’s for sure … most
scholars would hold that Matthew is teaching two things with it, two themes
that frequently appear as emphases in his Gospel. First, he is teaching the
importance of perseverance in prayer and trust, despite appearances … a
lesson later taught directly to the disciples by Jesus in the context of
predictions of persecution and the end of time. Second, he is teaching the
universality of Jesus’ mission … and this was a more challenging point.
Matthew was written originally in Aramaic, and was written for a Jewish
audience (a vast number of verses in Matthew are quotes from the Hebrew
Scriptures, as Matthew is at pains to show that Jesus is the foretold Messiah
of the Old Testament … all those Scriptures would have meant little or
nothing to a Gentile audience). Thus does Jesus say He has come for the lost
sheep of the house of Israel … in continuity with the prophecies of Isaiah
and Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Hosea (if not others as well). But the fact of the
matter was, as was well known by the time Matthew was redacted in the form we
have in Greek, many Jews did NOT accept Jesus as the Messiah, whereas Gentiles
did. And of course, this author knew of Paul’s missionary journeys and
perhaps some of his letters … the fact was simply that those who were NOT
Jewish were also invited, by the same persevering faith, to salvation in
Christ.

After Pentecost, Peter repeats the message.

Acts 3

22 For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you.

23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’

24 Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days.

25 You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.

Now, go ask a "Pentecostal" to prootext salvation, or where Jesus said not to keep the law. They accuse us of arguing from silence, which makes no sense, we argue from the scripture. They argue from silence. Jesus said to keep and observe all that the pharisee says to keep and observe. When the Holy Spirit controlled Peter at Pentecost, he never said you are dead to sin and alive to Christ. He repeated what Jesus taught in his earthly ministry. Which is the law. Repent of sins, confess, water baptism as a ceremonial cleansing. We don't get a water baptism, because we are in Christ, and have no sin.

Don't both Paul and Jesus talk about the greatest commandment: to love God with all your might and to love your neighbor as yourself? Galatians 5:16-26

But there is a proof text to it begining at Acts 9, which is original name for those of us who believe the Body began with Paul.

Paul said he is the first sinner saved, and the example for a saved sinner.

Romans 11

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry,

14 if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them.

15 For if their being cast away is the reconciling of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

I just put this up for the 6th or 7th time in a catholic thread for them to answer, and they avoid it like the bubonic plague. Israel is cast away, and gentiles are now saved by it. Unlike before, wheren gentiles had to bless Israel.

Why can this not be read as the Body beginning with Jesus and the cross?

 

[godrulz]

http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/classicdisney/zip-a-dee-doo-dah.htm

Dedicated to zippy:zoomin:

 

[chickenman]

:nono: