Theology Club: Is MAD doctrine correct?

Guyver

BANNED
Banned
MAD adherents highly value the power of prayer and believe it to be an essential aspect of their faith.

I agree with this.
 

Guyver

BANNED
Banned
Since it doesn't seem like anyone is really reading this stuff anyway....I'll stop now. Regards.
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
As am I, just because we do not post does not mean the conversation is not edifying. Please continue...
 

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Oh....sorry GR and Steko....didn't see your posts there. Maybe I'll post a couple more.

MAD people don't think that the church started at Pentecost, are not in favor of speaking in tongues and are very skeptical of Pentecostals in general.

I don't blame them though...having seen so many abuses in churches myself.

http://graceambassadors.com/midacts/did-the-church-begin-at-pentecost

-
I was saved in a Pentecostal Church(Church of GOD). I attended for about 2-1/2 to 3 years. I finally had to leave when what was preached, to me, didn't line up with what I was reading in scripture.
I consider many of them to be my brothers and sisters. If they're satisfied where they're at, it's their business. I wasn't satisfied and had to move on. I've seen a lot of abuse with regard to speaking in tongues and the claim to prophesy.
I've been modified premillennial/dispensational (Walvoord,Ryrie,JV McGee,Giesler, etc.) for at least thirty years, but I think that through my own studies there are some areas where the prominent dispensational teachers do not hold consistently to the dispensational hermeneutic. Since being on this forum and newly introduced to MAD adherents (I was already familiar with hyper-dispenstionalism) I've found that I have come to many of the same conclusions that they have......though I'm not all the way MAD.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
So what Nick? Jesus hadn't died yet. Why would they preach something that hadn't happend? They preached the kingdom of heaven was at hand because it was - JESUS WAS THERE!

That's kind of a big deal.

I'll go read it. I assume that you are starting it somewhere else because cessationism is not a MAD doctrine?

At least I hope not. We'll see.
Nick's point was that there were different sets of "good news" preached at different times throughout the Bible, thus there were different gospels at different times.

And cessation is a MAD doctrine.

This link teaches that water baptism is something a believer should not do, according to MAD doctrine....they view it as a work of the law.

http://graceambassadors.com/tradition/should-i-be-water-baptized

So, I think it's safe to say that one doctrine of MAD is that water baptism is not for believers today.
That's a fallacy. MAD teaches that it is not necessary for salvation, but MAD does not teach that it should never be done. Some MAD adherents may teach that, but they don't have any Scripture to support that view.

MAD adherents draw a clear distinction between Israel and the Church. Abraham is not their father. This is a view that I agree with.

http://graceambassadors.com/midacts/abraham-father-of-us-all
Actually Paul states, three different times, in Romans 4: 1, 12, and 16, that Abraham is also our father, as well as of those who are of the law.
 

Paulos

New member
MAD people believe that Paul preached a different gospel message than the other Apostles.

This is Peter's gospel:

1) Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. (Acts 10:43; 1 Peter 1:10-12, 2:24, 3:18)
2) He was buried and raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures. (Acts 10:40; 1 Peter 1:3, 1:21)
3) He now reigns from the right hand of God, and will reign until all his enemies have been destroyed. (Acts 2:30, 3:21; 1 Peter 3:22)
4) Then comes the resurrection when he will return to the earth and raise the souls who sleep. Those who are in Christ will be raised with imperishable bodies, and all will be judged. (1 Peter 1:3-4, 4:5)
5) Then comes the end. He will deliver the kingdom of God to the Father after destroying every rule, authority, and power. (1 Peter 1:13, 3:22, 4:7)

How does the above differ from Paul's gospel?
 

Paulos

New member
MAD adherents draw a clear distinction between Israel and the Church.

If Jesus is a Jew, and Gentile Christians are members of His Body (Ephesians 5:30), then how can we remain aliens to the commonwealth of Israel?

As Paul says in Ephesians 2:

11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel... 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ... 19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God.​

Ephesians 2:12 and 2:19 explicitly states that we are no longer "strangers and foreigners" to "the commonwealth of Israel", "but fellow citizens".

Abraham is not their father. This is a view that I agree with.

As LH pointed out, "Paul states, three different times, in Romans 4:1, 12, and 16, that Abraham is also our father", and to that list I would add:

Romans 4:11
And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he [Abraham] is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them.

Galatians 3:29
And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.​
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
This is Peter's gospel:

1) Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. (Acts 10:43; 1 Peter 1:10-12, 2:24, 3:18)
2) He was buried and raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures. (Acts 10:40; 1 Peter 1:3, 1:21)
3) He now reigns from the right hand of God, and will reign until all his enemies have been destroyed. (Acts 2:30, 3:21; 1 Peter 3:22)
4) Then comes the resurrection when he will return to the earth and raise the souls who sleep. Those who are in Christ will be raised with imperishable bodies, and all will be judged. (1 Peter 1:3-4, 4:5)
5) Then comes the end. He will deliver the kingdom of God to the Father after destroying every rule, authority, and power. (1 Peter 1:13, 3:22, 4:7)

How does the above differ from Paul's gospel?

  1. You're acting as though this encompasses Peter's entire message. What about Acts 2:38?
  2. Just because not everything differs [it wouldn't anyway] doesn't mean nothing differs.
  3. You aren't actually backing up your specific claims like you think you are. For instance, 1 Peter 1:3-4 doesn't mention imperishable bodies.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
If Jesus is a Jew, and Gentile Christians are members of His Body (Ephesians 5:30), then how can we remain aliens to the commonwealth of Israel?

As Paul says in Ephesians 2:
11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel... 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ... 19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God.​
Ephesians 2:12 and 2:19 explicitly states that we are no longer "strangers and foreigners" to "the commonwealth of Israel", "but fellow citizens".
As far as this goes, the commonwealth of Israel, in general, was cut off for their rejection of Jesus as Messiah. Which is why Paul does not refer to them in the second part of that passage, but rather states we are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, of which those who remain[ed] lost sheep of the house of Israel were/are not a part.
 

Guyver

BANNED
Banned
This is Peter's gospel:

1) Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. (Acts 10:43; 1 Peter 1:10-12, 2:24, 3:18)
2) He was buried and raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures. (Acts 10:40; 1 Peter 1:3, 1:21)
3) He now reigns from the right hand of God, and will reign until all his enemies have been destroyed. (Acts 2:30, 3:21; 1 Peter 3:22)
4) Then comes the resurrection when he will return to the earth and raise the souls who sleep. Those who are in Christ will be raised with imperishable bodies, and all will be judged. (1 Peter 1:3-4, 4:5)
5) Then comes the end. He will deliver the kingdom of God to the Father after destroying every rule, authority, and power. (1 Peter 1:13, 3:22, 4:7)

How does the above differ from Paul's gospel?

I don't see that it does Paulos. So this is probably a point that I would not be in agreement with MAD....especially as you put it here. That's right...IMO.

But, as Nick said with reference to 1st John not being written to the Body of Christ because of the notion of obeying commandments, and as the link I posted said that Paul's gospel differs from that of Peter, John, and even Jesus....it's the notion of obeying commandments. MAD people do not like to associate salvation with works of any kind. It is by grace through faith....which is obviously true...but how that works in the real world is something that a MAD person should probably address. Cause I could think of several things a saved person shouldn't do, wouldn't do...and Paul himself lists a bunch.

I have two points here. The first is that just because John said the commandments, doesn't necessarily mean that he was referencing the Law of Moses....Jesus gave a new commandment...love one another.

Next point...and this is kind of a big deal to me...because MAD may have this one right. At least their doctrine of the suspending of prophecy supports it. When you read the Epistles you see that Peter and John spoke of the time of the end being at hand. They literally believed that Christ could return at any minute. This makes me think that these things were written before the destruction of the temple...and that they were wrong. We are sitting here talking about it two thousand years later.

You linked 1 Peter 4:7 that states the end is at hand.

John wrote it is the last hour....two thousand years ago. This is obviously not correct as the world that we know still turns. 1 John 2:18

What could throw a monkey wrench in MAD doctrine is if Paul believed it too. If one thinks that Paul wrote Hebrews...as many or even most seem to accept....even the writer of Hebrews thought that the end was near.

Hebrews 10:25

Would you or anyone like to comment on what I have said here? How could one explain that the Apostles fully expected the end to come any time and said so....when we are still here two thousand years later?

Do you think that the notion of MAD with respect to the suspension of prophecy and insertion of a "Mystery" period of salvation by grace explains this?
 
Top