ECT Dispensationalism and the Teachings of Christ and Paul On the Pharisee Religion

[Jerry Shugart]

Romans 11: 26, is a text which has to be interpreted by use of other texts in Romans 11, especially Romans 11: 17-24.

We must go back to the original promise concerning the New Covenant promised to Israel in order to understand what Paul wrote at Romans 11:

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more" (Jer.31:31-34).​

The LORD says that He will make a New Covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. The "fathers" of those who will partake of this covenant were the children of Israel whom the Lord redeemed out of Egypt and the same people who broke His covenant (Jer.11:1-8). Since the "fathers" of these future members of the houses of Israel and Judah were the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob then that can only mean that in the future the members of both houses will also be the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

And all of those physical descendants will know the LORD and all of them will have their sins forgiven. Just like Paul said, "All Israel shall be saved."

 

[northwye]

The problem is that an argument from the Old Testament cannot overthrow a doctrine of the New Testament, which says that there is a unity between saved Jews and saved Gentiles. This is not a doctrine interpreted from New Testament texts that are ambiguous. The New Testament texts which say there is a unity between saved Gentiles and saved Jews are clear, with no uncertainty over whether the answer is Yes or No.

It is dispensationalism which as a man made theology asserts itself in opposition to these New Testament texts, so that to a dispensationalist who cannot question this theology there can be no New Testament doctrine saying saved Gentiles and saved Jews are in unity. In fact, this is one fundamental doctrine of the New Testament. That the Old Testament was done away with by Christ is another such basic doctrine.

And so in the New Testament those of the physical bloodline who are saved and those saved who are not of the physical bloodline are one and the same in Jesus Christ. Otherwise, dispensationalism would replace the Gospel with another Gospel, itself.

Even a dispensationalist who claims to be a Christian should know what these New Testament scriptures are which teach that there is such a unity between saved Gentiles and Saved Jews.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The problem is that an argument from the Old Testament cannot overthrow a doctrine of the New Testament, which says that there is a unity between saved Jews and saved Gentiles.

All you do is the put a foreign meaning on New Testament texts in order to deny what is plainly revealed in the OT.

Paul places the fulfillment of the New Covenant promised to Israel in the FUTURE when the Deliverer will turn away all ungodliness from Jacob (Israel):

"And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins" (Ro.11:26-27).​

Your eschatolgy has no place for this event to be fulfilled. Likewise, your eschatlogy has no place for the following promise which the LORD made to David to be fulfilled:

"Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime" (2 Sam.7:10).​

We can see that this promise will be fulfilled in the future in the land which the LORD gave to Jacob:

"Thus saith the Lord GOD; When I shall have gathered the house of Israel from the people among whom they are scattered, and shall be sanctified in them in the sight of the heathen, then shall they dwell in their land that I have given to my servant Jacob. And they shall dwell safely therein, and shall build houses, and plant vineyards; yea, they shall dwell with confidence, when I have executed judgments upon all those that despise them round about them; and they shall know that I am the LORD their God" (Ez.28:25-26).​

There has never been a time when the children of Israel were brought back to the land the LORD gave Jacob and their enemies ceased from afflicting them.

Your eschatology is a denial of the plain words of God. According to you the LORD made promises to David but He will never fulfill those promises.

 

[northwye]

I know of three New Testament texts which say that there is a unity between saved Jews and Saved Gentiles and all three are in Paul's writings. Since the New Testament states this doctrine in three different texts, with exactly the same meaning, this must be an important and basic New Testament doctrine.

There is no argument of the dialectic which can overthrow this doctrine. Forget trying to argue against it.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

There is no argument of the dialectic which can overthrow this doctrine. Forget trying to argue against it.

There is no way that you can give a rational explanation which defends your denial of what is clearly stated in the OT. That is why you don't even try to defend your ideas.

The problem is that an argument from the Old Testament cannot overthrow a doctrine of the New Testament, which says that there is a unity between saved Jews and saved Gentiles.

All you do is the put a foreign meaning on New Testament texts in order to deny what is plainly revealed in the OT.

Paul places the fulfillment of the New Covenant promised to Israel in the FUTURE when the Deliverer will turn away all ungodliness from Jacob (Israel):

"And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins" (Ro.11:26-27).​

Your eschatolgy has no place for this event to be fulfilled. Likewise, your eschatlogy has no place for the following promise which the LORD made to David to be fulfilled:

"Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime" (2 Sam.7:10).​

We can see that this promise will be fulfilled in the future in the land which the LORD gave to Jacob:

"Thus saith the Lord GOD; When I shall have gathered the house of Israel from the people among whom they are scattered, and shall be sanctified in them in the sight of the heathen, then shall they dwell in their land that I have given to my servant Jacob. And they shall dwell safely therein, and shall build houses, and plant vineyards; yea, they shall dwell with confidence, when I have executed judgments upon all those that despise them round about them; and they shall know that I am the LORD their God" (Ez.28:25-26).​

There has never been a time when the children of Israel were brought back to the land the LORD gave Jacob and their enemies ceased from afflicting them.

Your eschatology is a denial of the plain words of God. According to you the LORD made promises to David but He will never fulfill those promises.

 

[northwye]

One tactic of the dialectic is to attribute to the opponent motives, positions and ideas that are not accurate to what the opponent has said and paint him in a negative way.

And so the Chief Dispensationalist Verbal Wrestler on Theology Online has tried to defend dispensationam by use of texts from the Old Testament and by some of the tactics of the dialectic.

This defense and promotion of dispensationalism has shown that the theology is an opposition to central doctrines of the New Testament, an attempt to replace New Testament doctrine on the doing away with the Old Covenant in Hebrews 8 and II Corinthians 3: 7-11 and the doctrine that saved Jews and Saved Gentiles are in unity (Romans 10: 12, Galatians 3: 28 and Colossians 3: 11) with the dispensationalist doctrine that Old Covenant Israel of the flesh will be restored sometime in the future and that saved Jews, especially in the first century, remain "rightly divided" and separate from the saved Gentiles.

This shows that dispensationalism is a man made theology of the churches which is in opposition to and is trying to overthrow key New Testament doctrines.

At this point for this thread, the thread might as well be closed, if no others are interested in posting on it, since otherwise what was said before will just be repeated.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

And so the Chief Dispensationalist Verbal Wrestler on Theology Online has tried to defend dispensationam by use of texts from the Old Testament and by some of the tactics of the dialectic.

You defend your view by asserting that even though the LORD made promises to David He will never fulfill those promises.