ECT The "other" Gospel is not very good news

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
It is what they teach Jerry. They champion it.

You are another one who is not happy unless you are misrepresenting what the dispensationalists teach.

Please quote even one dispensationalist who denies the fact the NOW there is one only one people of God and that is those in the Body of Christ. And in the Body there is no distinction between the jew and the Gentile.

You people are either willfully ignorant or just dishonest. I don't know which is worse.
 

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
You are another one who is not happy unless you are misrepresenting what the dispensationalists teach.

Please quote even one dispensationalist who denies the fact the NOW there is one only one people of God and that is those in the Body of Christ. And in the Body there is no distinction between the jew and the Gentile.

You people are either willfully ignorant or just dishonest. I don't know which is worse.

:thumb: Yep!
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
You are another one who is not happy unless you are misrepresenting what the dispensationalists teach.

Please quote even one dispensationalist who denies the fact the NOW there is one only one people of God and that is those in the Body of Christ. And in the Body there is no distinction between the jew and the Gentile.

You people are either willfully ignorant or just dishonest. I don't know which is worse.





lol, of course they do, but they don't think that takes the place of the Israel program! lol, you always spin to win. They are never presented in the NT as side by side programs, there is never a mention of any tension about the two competing or conflicting, which they do in D'ism. It is a total phantom op (never showing up as reality in the NT).
 

northwye

New member
The doctrine of the ekklesia is something that seems to be mostly avoided on TOL. But there is such a doctrine.

John Wycliffe in his 1382 English translation of the Latin ecclesia used chirche. For example, Wycliffe says for Acts 6: 1, "But Saul was consentynge to his deth. And greet persecucioun was maad that dai in the chirche, that was in Jerusalem."

William Tyndale did not follow Wycliffe in using chirche, which would have been conistent with the Catholic meaning of Church, but instead used congregation for ekklesia consistently except for two verses in Acts where he used churche to mean a pagan place of worship. For example, Tyndale's translation for Acts 8: 1 says "Saul had pleasure in his deeth. And at yt tyme there was a great persecucion agaynst the congregacion which was at Ierusalem."

Theodore Beza in 1556 returned to the use of church to translate ekklesia - and the Geneva Bible followed him, using church instead of congregation. Then the King James followed the Geneva Bible and used church.

I Peter 5: 2-3 says "Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;
3. Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock."

The Capital C Church - whether Roman Catholic, Calvinist or Christian Zionist - rules over those who claim to be God's heritage.

By about the 4th century, religionists, with political rulers included among them, who mixed Pagan religion with the Gospel, began to create the Capital C Church.

Centuries after the Reformation, W.A. Crisswell, a dispensationalist, at the 1988 Southern Baptist Convention meeting in
San Antonio, got a resolution passed critical of the older Southern Baptist belief in the "priesthood of the believer" and promoted the authority of the Baptist clergy over the doctrines of the church members. Crisswell told a group of pastors that "the man of God who is the pastor of the church is the ruler."

The priesthood of the believer means that the believer has the authority from God to bring Christian doctrines and morality to the world - and also to be his own "priest" in interpreting the word of God. To be your own "priest" or preacher you must first know the truth from Scripture and have a strong love for it. Otherwise, the believer as "priest" simply accepts for himself some set of false doctrines and tries to make others believe the false doctrines.

Since Crisswell was a dispensationalist and dispensationalism is taught and maintained within a church system in which the preacher is the authority and rules over the beliefs of the members, he opposed the doctrine. The older pre-dispensationalist Southern Baptist priesthood of the believer does not work within the dispensationalist church system which rules over the beliefs of the members to make sure they follow dispensationalist doctrines.

J. Dwight Pentecost in his book Things To Come ( 1965) says "The church and Israel are two distinct groups with whom God has a divine plan."

Thats separation theology, which does not know it is grammatically illiterate. Church, from ekklesia, is a common noun, but Israel is unique, a proper noun. The ekklesia could correctly be a meeting of Israel, but to say that the Meeting and Israel are the two peoples of God does not make sense grammatically.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
there is never a mention of any tension about the two competing or conflicting, which they do in D'ism.

Romans 15
19 Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:

21 But as it is written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand.

22 For which cause also I have been much hindered from coming to you.

23 But now having no more place in these parts, and having a great desire these many years to come unto you;



Believe the book. Put down the commentaries.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
lol, of course they do, but they don't think that takes the place of the Israel program! lol, you always spin to win. They are never presented in the NT as side by side programs, there is never a mention of any tension about the two competing or conflicting, which they do in D'ism. It is a total phantom op (never showing up as reality in the NT).

Please quote even one dispensationalist who denies the fact the NOW there is one only one people of God and that is those in the Body of Christ. And in the Body there is no distinction between the jew and the Gentile.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Please quote even one dispensationalist who denies the fact the NOW there is one only one people of God and that is those in the Body of Christ. And in the Body there is no distinction between the jew and the Gentile.





You are not reading clearly Jerry. They do. What they DON'T do (as I said--GO READ!!!) Is realize that takes the place of what was Israel. They prob also say the people of the mission of Messiah was an after thought. They also insist on there being unfinished business with Israel that God to go back and do with Israel. You have said so a hundred times, you just don't seem to be aware.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
J. Dwight Pentecost in his book Things To Come ( 1965) says "The church and Israel are two distinct groups with whom God has a divine plan."

He is exactly right.

Or perhaps you want to argue that you are a part of this OT group?:

"For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt" (Deut.7:6-8).​

Are you a part of that group?
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
You are not reading clearly Jerry.

Just because you say that they do means absolutely nothing!

Prove it.

Please quote even one dispensationalist who denies the fact the NOW there is one only one people of God and that is those in the Body of Christ. And in the Body there is no distinction between the jew and the Gentile.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
He is exactly right.

Or perhaps you want to argue that you are a part of this OT group?:

"For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt" (Deut.7:6-8).​

Are you a part of that group?




From the beginning promises just to Israel it was going to have a mission to the nations. That arrived in Christ. Go see the consistent use of those promises about the mission of the Gospel. The NT is full of quoting that way, not other passages your way.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
From the beginning promises just to Israel it was going to have a mission to the nations. That arrived in Christ. Go see the consistent use of those promises about the mission of the Gospel. The NT is full of quoting that way, not other passages your way.

Yes or no? Are you a member of this group?:

"For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt"
(Deut.7:6-8).​
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Obviously now in the 21st century, I'm a member of what the Gen 12/15 promises became according to NT.

Enjoy your witch-hunting 'gotcha' questions but you didn't (getchme).
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
From the beginning promises just to Israel it was going to have a mission to the nations. That arrived in Christ. Go see the consistent use of those promises about the mission of the Gospel. The NT is full of quoting that way, not other passages your way.

Matthew 10:23 (KJV)
To the nations, when the LORD returns. Believe the book.
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
You are another one who is not happy unless you are misrepresenting what the dispensationalists teach.

Please quote even one dispensationalist who denies the fact the NOW there is one only one people of God and that is those in the Body of Christ. And in the Body there is no distinction between the jew and the Gentile.

You people are either willfully ignorant or just dishonest. I don't know which is worse.
Yeppers.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
See what you are like Tam? I had to correct him twice and YOU still went back and read his original question only, not my two replies (1 line each).

He doesn't pay attention, so why would I trust him with Galatians? The thing he thinks is the question is not.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
When are you going to grapple the actual question. It is not whether there is the unified basis now. It is whether the other gospel you claim existed in the murky background of the early church was good. The one mentioned in Acts 15:2 and the letter there was DISTURBING.
 
Top