For Sincere Inquisitors ONLY: MAD Explained

[godrulz]

You didn't just notice halfway through your post, godrulz. Be honest. And respectful.

Lie detector on: I post quickly on many topics that are similar. Half way through the post, I glanced at the top and realized what thread it was. I then added the bottom part to support Jerry's view. I think these are important points for sincere inquisitors of truth/disp views. Since I am not welcome here, I refrained (to our mutual loss). So, I apologize, but I could not bring myself to delete a potentially valuable post.

Even though abstention is voluntary (realistically), I will try to not rock the boat. If I post here again, feel free to complain to me. It was an honest mistake, but I am too type A to just delete my hard work. Thx for letting one slip in (as well, STP is making the same points/posts on other threads, so it is easy to get mixed up by clicking on email notification without carefully looking at the top...the similarity makes the brain think the topic is on a more friendly thread).

Carry on...my hand is slapped.:jazz:

(one should not judge the sincerity of an inquisitor by whether they agree with MAD or not, huh?)

 

[Choleric]

Agree or not, did that all make sense? Let me know if you need me to clarify further.


Thanks, my friend.

Randy

Very clear...thanks.

 

[Choleric]

Choleric,

The previous post by Randy on being "born of the Spirit" is a perfect example of where Neo-MAD differs from the original teaching of Mid Acts dispensationalism. Let me show you the errors of Randy and those in the Neo-MAD camp. Randy certainly implies that being born again has nothing to do with beimng saved, writing that:

The Lord Jesus said that no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of the Spirit (Jn.3:5). We also know that only those who are now saved have been translated into the kingdom (Col.1:13). So if words have any meaning it is absolutely necessary for the sinner to be born of the Spirit in order to enter into the kingdom of God so therefore being born again is necessary for salvation.

Randy says:

Anyone who is familiar with the meaning of the Greek word translated "regeneration" knows that that word literally means born again. In the following verse the Apostle Paul describes how he was saved:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5).

Here Paul uses the word "regeneration" in regard to his salvation.

This word is translated from the Greek word paliggenesia, which is the combination of palin and genesis.

Palin means "joined to verbs of all sorts,it denotes renewal or repetition of the action" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

Genesis means "used of birth, nativity" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

When we combine the meaning of the two words we have a "repetition of a birth."

It is obvious that the reference is not to a "physical" rebirth, or the repetition of one's physical birth. Paul could only be speaking of a repetition of a spiritual birth. And the words that follow make it certain that the "birth" of which Paul is referring to is a "spiritual" birth—"renewing of the Holy Spirit."

I wonder if Randy would argue that a regeneration of the Spirt is not necessary for salvation.

Randy also says:

This is not referring to the new birth but instead to the glorious body the Christian will put on at the rapture, and that is the same "blessed hope" referred to here by Paul:

"Awaiting our blessed hope, and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13).

This refers to the Christian's inheritance:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you" (1 Pet.1:3-4).

This is a body that is reserved in heaven and is described as being incorruptible. This matches up perfectly with the description of the body which Christians will put on at the rapture:

"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven" (2 Cor.5:1-2).

"We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel" (Col.1:3-5).

"Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality" (1 Cor.15:51-53).

Let us also look at the following verse from the pen of John:
"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is" (1 Jn.3:2).

These Christians were taught that when the Lord Jesus appears then those still living "shall be like Him," meaning that they would also have glorious bodies like His glorious body. The Scriptures will be searched in vain for any teaching that the saints who remain alive at the Lord Jesus' coming to set up His kingdom will be changed at His return. This is obviously referring to what will happen at the rapture, and only those in the Body of Christ will be caught up then. That means that those who received the Jewish epistles are members of the Body of Christ--despite the teaching of those within the Neo-MAD community.

In His grace,
Jerry

Thx Jerry. I appreciate you taking the time.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Has this thread now become a debate thread?

:e4e:

I certainly don't want to debate in this thread.

I'd just like to ask Jerry and godrulz to think hard about whether or not the man Christ Jesus is in the kingdom of God.

 

[Lighthouse]

You didn't just notice halfway through your post, godrulz. Be honest. And respectful.

Not to mention, if he really did realize at that point he would have stopped typing and canceled the post.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I'd just like to ask Jerry and godrulz to think hard about whether or not the man Christ Jesus is in the kingdom of God.

The man Jesus Christ is now sitting at the right hand of the Father in heaven at this very moment. So what is your point?

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The man Jesus Christ is now sitting at the right hand of the Father in heaven at this very moment. So what is your point?

In His grace,
Jerry

The point:

How did the man Christ Jesus who walked this earth in flesh and blood get back up to where he was before, with the glory he had before, where flesh and blood cannot enter and cannot see, in the kingdom of God?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The point:

How did the man Christ Jesus who walked this earth in flesh and blood get back up to where he was before, with the glory he had before, where flesh and blood cannot enter and cannot see, in the kingdom of God?

The new glorified body which the Christian will put on at the rapture is spoken of in the following way by Paul:

"For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked" (2 Cor.5:2-3).

When the Lord Jesus ascended into heaven He was clothed with His heavenly body. Sir Robert Anderson writes:

"True it is that, as "the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same. He assumed "a natural body." "For there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body." The one pertains to "the first man," who is "of the earth earthy, the other to "the second Man," who is "of heaven." For the Lord from heaven is "Very Man," and it is as Man that He is now upon the throne. But the body is not the man: it is but the tent, the outward dress, as it were, which covers Him. And He is "the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever " the same who once trod the roads of Galilee and the streets of Jerusalem. He is enthroned as Man, but no longer now in "flesh and blood." For ere He "passed through the heavens" He changed His dress. (Anderson, The Lord From Heaven, Chapter 3).

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The new glorified body which the Christian will put on at the rapture is spoken of in the following way by Paul:

1 Cor 15
49: And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50: Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Jesus Christ bore the image of the earthy, and now bears the image of the heavenly. He was begotten of Mary, and he was begotten from the dead. Born twice. Born again. The man, the Lord Jesus Christ, is in the Kingdom of God.

As chickenman would say, "I'll let you have the last word."

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jesus Christ bore the image of the earthy, and now bears the image of the heavenly. He was begotten of Mary, and he was begotten from the dead. Born twice. Born again. The man, the Lord Jesus Christ, is in the Kingdom of God.

As chickenman would say, "I'll let you have the last word."

You confuse the "born agan" experience with resurrection. Being "born again" is the same things as "regeneration," something that happens to believers BEFORE they are resurrected.

In the following verse the Apostle Paul describes how he was saved:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5).

Here Paul uses the word "regeneration" in regard to his salvation. This word is translated from the Greek word paliggenesia, which is the combination of palin and genesis.

Palin means "joined to verbs of all sorts,it denotes renewal or repetition of the action" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

Genesis means "used of birth, nativity" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

When we combine the meaning of the two words we have a "repetition of a birth" or "born again."

Regeneration is not the same as "resurrection" as Paul made it plain that he had already been regenerated at the time when he wrote his epistles and at that time he had not yet been resurrected.

This simple truth seems to be way over the head of both you and Randy!

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[chickenman]

This simple truth seems to be way over the head of both you and Randy!

Jerry,
Please don't be that way in this thread. Your posting style doesn't fit with the purpose of this thread. My respectful request is that you either simply post your view without provoking others, or don't post in here at all. There are plenty of threads where you can do that. This is a non-debate, non-confrontational thread for people that want to read and interact without that mess.

Thanks,
Randy

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry,
Please don't be that way in this thread. Your posting style doesn't fit with the purpose of this thread. My respectful request is that you either simply post your view without provoking others, or don't post in here at all. There are plenty of threads where you can do that. This is a non-debate, non-confrontational thread for people that want to read and interact without that mess.

Thanks,
Randy

OK, Randy, I will honor your request.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[chickenman]

OK, Randy, I will honor your request.

In His grace,
Jerry

Thanks so much, Jerry! :up:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

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.

Here we can see that Randy says that the gospel God dispensed to the Twelve was "specifically pertinent to the chosen nation of Israel who awaited their coming tribulation and promised kingdom."

That may be the teaching of those within the Neo-MAD camp but those who originally taught Mid Acts dispensationalism said that that gospel was pertinent to those in the whole world and not just to Israel. That is why the Lord Jesus gave the following commandment to His disciples:

"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mk.16:16).

"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8).

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[chatmaggot]

Here we can see that Randy says that the gospel God dispensed to the Twelve was "specifically pertinent to the chosen nation of Israel who awaited their coming tribulation and promised kingdom."

That may be the teaching of those within the Neo-MAD camp but those who originally taught Mid Acts dispensationalism said that that gospel was pertinent to those in the whole world and not just to Israel. That is why the Lord Jesus gave the following commandment to His disciples:

"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mk.16:16).

"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8).

In His grace,
Jerry

If God had not presented to Paul the Gospel of the Dispensation of the Grace of God then, yes, the message given to the 12 would have been the message meant for the whole World. However, things changed. Therefore the message changed, thus the agreement in Galatians between Paul and the 12 as to who they were to administer to.

If the 12 were supposed to go unto all of the world as Jesus said, then they forgot to do so.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Here we can see that Randy says that the gospel God dispensed to the Twelve was "specifically pertinent to the chosen nation of Israel who awaited their coming tribulation and promised kingdom."

That may be the teaching of those within the Neo-MAD camp but those who originally taught Mid Acts dispensationalism said that that gospel was pertinent to those in the whole world and not just to Israel. That is why the Lord Jesus gave the following commandment to His disciples:

"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mk.16:16).

"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8).

In His grace,
Jerry

Mark 8
26: The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation; and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter.
27: But Jesus said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it unto the dogs.

Matthew 10
22: And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.
23: But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

They will "go ye into all the world" when the King is ruling in the Kingdom.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

If the 12 were supposed to go unto all of the world as Jesus said, then they forgot to do so.

The point was whether or not Randy is right when he stated that the gospel God dispensed to the Twelve was "specifically pertinent to the chosen nation of Israel who awaited their coming tribulation and promised kingdom."

If that gospel was not pertinent to those in the whole world then why were they told to preach that gospel in all the world?:

"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mk.16:16).

Are we supposed to believe that that gospel was not pertinent to those in all the world but nonetheless the Lord Jesus told them to preach it in all the world?

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Jerry Shugart]

They will "go ye into all the world" when the King is ruling in the Kingdom.

they will go into the world and preach that gospel BEFORE the king is ruling in the kingdom (Mt.24:14).

But at least now you understand that that gospel is not only pertinent to just the Twelve and Israel.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

they will go into the world and preach that gospel BEFORE the king is ruling in the kingdom (Mt.24:14).

But at least now you understand that that gospel is not only pertinent to just the Twelve and Israel.

In His grace,
Jerry

Yes, I know that the gospel of the kingdom will be preached to Gentiles.

How do you know that the "end" in Matthew 24:14 is specifically about the end of the tribulation? Have you considered 1 Cor 15:24-26 (KJV)?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, I know that the gospel of the kingdom will be preached to Gentiles.

How do you know that the "end" in Matthew 24:14 is specifically about the end of the tribulation? Have you considered 1 Cor 15:24-26 (KJV)?

The "gospel of the kingdom" announces that the kingdom is at hand--not here already!