Theology Club: Evidence that the Present Dispensation Began at Acts 9?

Right Divider

Body part
Why do you keep accusing me of things which are not true?

Again, I challenge you to quote me saying such a thing.

I can see that you are so intent on finally winning an argument that you just make up things about your opponents position.
Then I guess that your position is unclear to me.

Do you believe that the dispensation of the grace of God was given to Paul? and that this occurred somewhere in the middle of the book of Acts? And that this dispensation is different than the dispensation given to Israel (i.e., the kingdom)?
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Then I guess that your position is unclear to me.

Do you believe that the dispensation of the grace of God was given to Paul? and that this occurred somewhere in the middle of the book of Acts? And that this dispensation is different than the dispensation given to Israel (i.e., the kingdom)?

Yes on all three counts.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Jerry Shugart;aning of John 3:16. You do not want others to see just how blind you are to the truths found in the Bible.[/QUOTE said:
Hi Jerry S , and John 3:16 reads , For God so loved the world , that He gave His only begotten Son , that whosoever believeth in Him should not PERISH , but have everlasting life !!

#1 , This is not for the Body of Christ ! Nor can you prove it at any time !!

#2 , Just like the CONTEXT of John 3:5 is beyond you !!

#3 , He is speaking to Israel and not the BOC !!

#4 , The verb PERISH is in the AORIST TENSE and is in Jesus earthly ministry !

#5 The verb " HAVE " is in the Present Tense as well as the Verb " BELIEVETH " and speaks to those during Jesus ministry !!

John 3:5 TRUMPED you !!

Mid-Acts position is a cover for the Acts 13 position

dan p
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
1 , This is not for the Body of Christ ! Nor can you prove it at any time !!

You evidently do not know that the meaning of the Greek word translated "whosoever" means "every one, any one" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

So with that in view the verse means this:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that every one who believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).​

Why should anyone believe that this is only speaking of some who believe but not all who believe?

#2 , Just like the CONTEXT of John 3:5 is beyond you !!

I think that all of this is beyond you.

#3 , He is speaking to Israel and not the BOC !!

No, the words at John 3:16 are the words of John. The Lord Jesus' words ceased at John 3:12. Otherwidse we must believe that the Lord Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus on the earth and at the same time He told Nicodemus that He was in heaven (Jn.3:13). The Lord did not ascend into heaven until after He was resurrected from the dead.

#4 , The verb PERISH is in the AORIST TENSE and is in Jesus earthly ministry !

So? That does not help your argument in any way.

#5 The verb " HAVE " is in the Present Tense as well as the Verb " BELIEVETH " and speaks to those during Jesus ministry !!

Again, those are the words of John and they were written after the Lord's earthly ministry of His first advent was already over.

John 3:5 TRUMPED you !!

All you did was proved that you are confused.
 

whitestone

Well-known member
I see no evidence that the present "dispensation of the grace of God" began at Acts 9. Here are three quotes from the pen of Paul where he speaks of a "dispensation" that has been committed or given to him:

"If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me toward you" (Eph. 3:2).​

"Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God" (Col.1:25).​

"...a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me" (1 Cor.9:17).​

The "dispensation" which was committed to Paul is in regard to "God's grace", a "ministry", and a "gospel." Here Paul sums up his dispensational responsibility:

"But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20: 24).​

The present dispensation began when the dispensational responsibility was first exercised by Paul. And since the following verse is speaking about Paul's gospel we can know that the present dispensation did not begin until he began to preach that gospel to Gentiles:

"But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being" (Gal.1:15-16).​

I believe that Paul first preached the gospel of the grace of God to the Gentiles here:

"Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:46-48).​

After an examination of all the evidence I can only conclude that the present "dispensation of the grace of God" began at Acts 13 and not Acts 9.

What evidence can anyone give that it began at Acts 9?


lol,not to be testy but you provide an scripture claiming the Gospel first began in Acts 13,,yet in Acts 13:46 KJV Paul himself states it was necessary for it to "first begin" with (those) and that he was then leaving and turning to the gentiles,,,"where again was it first delivered"?,,,,
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
lol,not to be testy but you provide an scripture claiming the Gospel first began in Acts 13,,yet in Acts 13:46 KJV Paul himself states it was necessary for it to "first begin" with (those) and that he was then leaving and turning to the gentiles,,,"where again was it first delivered"?,,,,

The gospel which Paul peached prior to the one he preached at Acts 13 to the Gentiles was this one and he preached it to the Jews:

"And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God...proving that this is the very Christ" (Acts 9:20,22).​

The gospel which was first preached to the Gentiles at Acts 13 is this one:

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you...For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Cor.15:1,3-4).​
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
So that makes you a Mid-Acts dispensationalist of some sort or another.

That is correct. I follow the original MAD teaching of Sir Robert Anderson, the father of systemized Mid Acts Dispensationalism. In the original teaching, both Anderson and J.C. O'Hair taught that throughout history men have been saved in only one way--by grace through faith apart from works.

Both men also taught that the TWELVE are members of the Body of Christ and that the doctrine found in the epistles beginning at Romans through Jude are for those in the Body of Christ.
 

Right Divider

Body part
That is correct. I follow the original MAD teaching of Sir Robert Anderson, the father of systemized Mid Acts Dispensationalism. In the original teaching, both Anderson and J.C. O'Hair taught that throughout history men have been saved in only one way--by grace through faith apart from works.

Both men also taught that the TWELVE are members of the Body of Christ and that the doctrine found in the epistles beginning at Romans through Jude are for those in the Body of Christ.
So you think that some us are heretics because we have a view that scripture shows two distinct (and yet unified in God) realms for believers (as demonstrated by many scriptures, including Paul's reference to the dispensation of the fullness of times when BOTH are joined together)?
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
So you think that some us are heretics because we have a view that scripture shows two distinct (and yet unified in God) realms for believers (as demonstrated by many scriptures, including Paul's reference to the dispensation of the fullness of times when BOTH are joined together)?

I believe that the original MAD teaching is the truth of God and it cannot be shown to be in error.

On the other hand, the Neo-MAD teaching is full of errors and it is easily shown to be in error. Unfortunately, not many people are aware of the two different types of MAD and too often the original MAD is drug through the mud because of guilt by association with Neo-MAD.

Neo-MAD is Satan's tool that in many instances hinders many from actually seeing the glorious truths of the true teaching of MAD!
 
Last edited:

Right Divider

Body part
I believe that the original MAD teaching is the truth of God and it cannot be shown to be in error.

On the other hand, the Neo-MAD teaching is full of errors and it is easily shown to be in error. Unfortunately, not many people are aware of the two different types of MAD and too often the original MAD is drug through the mud because of guilt by association with Neo-MAD.

Neo-MAD is Satan's tool that in many instances hinders many from actually seeing the glorious truths of the true teaching of MAD!
Ah, the arrogant self-righteous Jerry again.
 

Danoh

New member
I believe that the original MAD teaching is the truth of God and it cannot be shown to be in error.

On the other hand, the Neo-MAD teaching is full of errors and it is easily shown to be in error. Unfortunately, not many people are aware of the two different types of MAD and too often the original MAD is drug through the mud because of guilt by association with Neo-MAD.

Neo-MAD is Satan's tool that in many instances hinders many from actually seeing the glorious truths of the true teaching of MAD!

So says The Adversary's main "tool" against Mid-Acts brethren just because they won't play ball with him exactly as he sees fit; thus, his decades old fit, lol
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
So says The Adversary's main "tool" against Mid-Acts brethren just because they won't play ball with him exactly as he sees fit; thus, his decades old fit, lol

Your ideas are nothing but a perversion of the true MAD.

You are devious and that is why you refuse to talk honestly about the meaning of the verses which I quote to prove that your ideas are nothing but a perversion of true MAD. You have a hidden agenda to destroy true MAD.

"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousnes; whose end shall be according to their works" (2 Cor.11:14-15).​

Now everyone will know why you stalk those who teach the truth and why you refuse to act in an honest manner when it comes to discussing the meaning of certain Scriptures.

That is why you just flat out refuse to give your interpretation of the meaning of the following verse:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).​
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
So you think that some us are heretics because we have a view that scripture shows two distinct (and yet unified in God) realms for believers (as demonstrated by many scriptures, including Paul's reference to the dispensation of the fullness of times when BOTH are joined together)?

I believe that the original MAD teaching is the truth of God and it cannot be shown to be in error.

On the other hand, the Neo-MAD teaching is full of errors and it is easily shown to be in error. Unfortunately, not many people are aware of the two different types of MAD and too often the original MAD is drug through the mud because of guilt by association with Neo-MAD.

Neo-MAD is Satan's tool that in many instances hinders many from actually seeing the glorious truths of the true teaching of MAD!
 

Right Divider

Body part
I believe that the original MAD teaching is the truth of God and it cannot be shown to be in error.
There is a difference between "cannot" and "have not", Jerry. I think this shows the kind of arrogance that you suffer from.

On the other hand, the Neo-MAD teaching is full of errors and it is easily shown to be in error. Unfortunately, not many people are aware of the two different types of MAD and too often the original MAD is drug through the mud because of guilt by association with Neo-MAD.

Neo-MAD is Satan's tool that in many instances hinders many from actually seeing the glorious truths of the true teaching of MAD!
Why don't you start some threads on these great heresies? I'm not sure quite which great Satanic doctrines have your undies in such a bunch.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
As you should know by now a dispensation is a "stewardship" and the ones who have been given the stewardship by the LORD have a specific responsibily to carry out.
Here comes JS, once again denying that a dispensation of the gospel was committed unto Paul/ "unto me", not us (1 Corinthians 9:17 KJV), the dispensation of the grace of God was given to Paul "to you-ward (to us, directional Ephesians 3:1-6 KJV) and a dispensation of God was given to Paul (Colossians 1:25 KJV) for us.

It never says that we were committed or given those things, but Paul to us and for us! Anyone can and should go and actually study this out and look at the language on the page that Jerry ignores and/or tries to change.
 

Danoh

New member
There is a difference between "cannot" and "have not", Jerry. I think this shows the kind of arrogance that you suffer from.

Why don't you start some threads on these great heresies? I'm not sure quite which great Satanic doctrines have your undies in such a bunch.

Its very simple, Jerry's "original" was found off-base decades ago.

And by the very principle recurrent throughout men like O'Hair's writings as to what had allowed them to see Paul's Apostleship as distinct to begin with - when - they consistently applied the principle, that is.

Until that is explored, and applied - and earnestly - round and round some will go.

But even that will meet with the need to glory in it over others that the recurrent pattern of some continually points to is their disease.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
There is a difference between "cannot" and "have not", Jerry. I think this shows the kind of arrogance that you suffer from.

There you go again. You don't even attempt to prove anything about the subject of this thread and instead you are obsessed with trying to assassinate my character.

Why don't you start some threads on these great heresies? I'm not sure quite which great Satanic doctrines have your undies in such a bunch.

The thread I started on the meaning of John 3:16 proves that the Neo-MAD's idea that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works is nothing but foolishness.

I am waiting for you to give us your interpretation of the meaning of that verse on that thread.

But I know that all you will do is run and hide from that verse.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Here comes JS, once again denying that a dispensation of the gospel was committed unto Paul/ "unto me", not us (1 Corinthians 9:17 KJV), the dispensation of the grace of God was given to Paul "to you-ward (to us, directional Ephesians 3:1-6 KJV) and a dispensation of God was given to Paul (Colossians 1:25 KJV) for us.

That is not true and you know it. In my OP I said the following:

The "dispensation" which was committed to Paul is in regard to "God's grace", a "ministry", and a "gospel." Here Paul sums up his dispensational responsibility:

"But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20: 24).​

It is sad that you are so desperate to win an argument that you will go so far to say things which are not true about what I teach.

It never says that we were committed or given those things, but Paul to us and for us! Anyone can and should go and actually study this out and look at the language on the page that Jerry ignores and/or tries to change.

Do you disapprove of those who preach the gospel, the same stewardship which was first given to Paul:

"...a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me" (1 Cor.9:17).​

You forget that we are stewards of the mysteries. And how is it possible that we can preach the mystery of the gospel without actually preaching the gospel?

Your spiritual I.Q. is practically nonexistent!
 

Right Divider

Body part
There you go again. You don't even attempt to prove anything about the subject of this thread and instead you are obsessed with trying to assassinate my character.
No, Jerry.... just pointing out that your statement is an OVER statement.

To say that "it cannot be shown to be in error." would require knowledge that only God has and not knowledge that you actually have.

The best that you can say based on the knowledge that YOU actually have is that "it has not been proven to be in error".

The thread I started on the meaning of John 3:16 proves that the Neo-MAD's idea that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works is nothing but foolishness.

I am waiting for you to give us your interpretation of the meaning of that verse on that thread.

But I know that all you will do is run and hide from that verse.
No again , Jerry. I have no problem with understanding that eternal life is always by the grace of God through faith. And yet I can see that the faith's have differences. Faith under the law and faith NOT under the law are definitely different.
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
 
Top