Has the Church Replaced Israel ?

[Gary K]

Are you able to read? Because that's clearly not what I said.



First of all, your verse numbering is wrong.

Second...

Keep reading.

Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?”He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” And He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground. So now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. A fugitive and a vagabond you shall be on the earth.” And Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear! Surely You have driven me out this day from the face of the ground; I shall be hidden from Your face; I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth, and it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me.” And the Lord said to him, “Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him. Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad; and Irad begot Mehujael, and Mehujael begot Methushael, and Methushael begot Lamech. Then Lamech took for himself two wives: the name of one was Adah, and the name of the second was Zillah. And Adah bore Jabal. He was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal. He was the father of all those who play the harp and flute. And as for Zillah, she also bore Tubal-Cain, an instructor of every craftsman in bronze and iron. And the sister of Tubal-Cain was Naamah. Then Lamech said to his wives:“Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;Wives of Lamech, listen to my speech!For I have killed a man for wounding me,Even a young man for hurting me. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.”

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 4:8-24 - New King James Version

Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” And He said, “What have you done? The...

www.biblegateway.com

Note that Cain was not put to death for killing his brother, and God even prohibited men from putting him to death.

Note that Lamech killed a man in response to him assaulting Lamech, when the just punishment would be to do the same amount of harm, not "seventy-sevenfold."

Note that it's likely that the man who injured Lamech likely did it intentionally, which indicates that society is already breaking apart. In other words, lawlessness.



Correct. There were no transgressions against any absolute standard.

The only standard was what men felt like doing.

In other words:

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 6:5-6 - New King James Version

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

www.biblegateway.com

God's law is absolute. Violating His law is sin.

But that doesn't mean that there has to be a law kept by men, nor that men's law is in line with God's law.

The only law that existed before the Flood was broken by Adam and Eve, and that law was, "do not partake of the law (the knowledge of good and evil).

There was no law (other than that there is no law by which men could be governed) between Genesis 3:23 and Genesis 8:19, which is right after the Flood, where God immediately repealed the "no law" status quo, and implemented a command to put to death those who shed man's blood.

“Whoever sheds man’s blood,By man his blood shall be shed;For in the image of GodHe made man. And as for you, be fruitful and multiply;Bring forth abundantly in the earthAnd multiply in it.”

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 9:6, Genesis 9:7 - New King James Version

“Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man.

www.biblegateway.com

You ask me if I can read and then confirm what I asked you. You said the following:

God already tried not having a law to govern society. It ended in Him destroying the world and wiping out all humanity in the Flood, save eight people.

You clearly said God tried not having a law to govern society.

 

[JudgeRightly]

You ask me if I can read

Because you asked me why I said something that I didn't say.

What I ACTUALLY SAID was:

God already tried not having a law to govern society. It ended in Him destroying the world and wiping out all humanity in the Flood, save eight people.

It's why the period from Genesis 3:23 to Genesis 8:19 is called the dispensation of conscience, because there was no law, and people acted according to their consciences. It ended up being a disaster, one so bad that God even regretted making man, and had to destroy the earth.

Please learn to respond to what people actually said, and not what you think they said, or what you wanted them to say.

and then confirm what I asked you. You said the following:

Yes I did.

You clearly said God tried not having a law to govern society.

Yes. There was no law that governed society between Adam and Eve getting kicked out of the garden, and up until Noah left the Ark.. God did not enforce His law upon the earth.

Men did what they pleased. And they became wicked. (Genesis 6:5-6)

God, on Judgement Day, when someone complains that He should have tried having no law, can point to the period before the flood as evidence that it doesn't work to not have a law.

The point I was trying to make before I got sidetracked was that society cannot function on just "love, mercy, and grace." There must also be justice, and punishment for wrongdoing, at least until Christ returns.

Clete and Cabinet and I were talking about what a good justice system would look like, and Tambora comes in and tries to claim that "since David was shown mercy by not being put to death by God for his adultery, therefore we shouldn't have the death penalty for adultery."

Do you not see the problem with that?

Just because God forgives a sinner once or twice doesn't mean that the law against his crime is abolished or repealed.

The law against adultery is still in effect.

Just societies rightly implement the law against adultery, and punish adulterers by putting them to death.

God alone has the right to forgive the sin against Him. He did that in David's case, yet David still suffered the consequences of his actions. It doesn't mean that society shouldn't have the death penalty for murderers.

 

[Gary K]

Because you asked me why I said something that I didn't say.

What I ACTUALLY SAID was:



Please learn to respond to what people actually said, and not what you think they said, or what you wanted them to say.



Yes I did.



Yes. There was no law that governed society between Adam and Eve getting kicked out of the garden, and up until Noah left the Ark.. God did not enforce His law upon the earth.

Men did what they pleased. And they became wicked. (Genesis 6:5-6)

God, on Judgement Day, when someone complains that He should have tried having no law, can point to the period before the flood as evidence that it doesn't work to not have a law.

The point I was trying to make before I got sidetracked was that society cannot function on just "love, mercy, and grace." There must also be justice, and punishment for wrongdoing, at least until Christ returns.

Clete and Cabinet and I were talking about what a good justice system would look like, and Tambora comes in and tries to claim that "since David was shown mercy by not being put to death by God for his adultery, therefore we shouldn't have the death penalty for adultery."

Do you not see the problem with that?

Just because God forgives a sinner once or twice doesn't mean that the law against his crime is abolished or repealed.

The law against adultery is still in effect.

Just societies rightly implement the law against adultery, and punish adulterers by putting them to death.

God alone has the right to forgive the sin against Him. He did that in David's case, yet David still suffered the consequences of his actions. It doesn't mean that society shouldn't have the death penalty for murderers.

I still don't understand your reasoning for God killed the antedeluvians because of their sins. So there were clearly divine laws in effect. I see no way around it. And God held the antedeluvians responsible for their thoughts as well as their actions just like Jesus laid out in the sermon on the mount. God is just as there can be no mercy without justice so unless the law of God was in effect He could not have held them accountable.

Genesis 6: 5 ¶And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.*n1*n2

 

[JudgeRightly]

I still don't understand your reasoning for God killed the antedeluvians because of their sins.

God killed them because they were so evil.

So there were clearly divine laws in effect.

It's called God's righteous character.

I see no way around it. And God held the antedeluvians responsible for their thoughts as well as their actions just like Jesus laid out in the sermon on the mount. God is just as there can be no mercy without justice so unless the law of God was in effect He could not have held them accountable.

Morality is absolute, whether it's enforced or not. The point was that there was no law on the earth.

Genesis 6: 5 ¶And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.*n1*n2

Again, the point was that no law was in effect during the period mentioned.

Men did what they wanted, and responded in the way they felt was right.

Hence, "Dispensation of Conscience."

It didn't result in "love, mercy, and grace," as Tambora thinks it would.

It resulted in men becoming so wicked that God had to wipe them out.

Their women were laying with fallen angels, and having their children (the nephilim, the "giants in those days"). Their very genes had become corrupted, but only Noah (and by extension, his sons) was "perfect in his generations."

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand...

 

[Gary K]

God killed them because they were so evil.



It's called God's righteous character.



Morality is absolute, whether it's enforced or not. The point was that there was no law on the earth.



Again, the point was that no law was in effect during the period mentioned.

Men did what they wanted, and responded in the way they felt was right.

Hence, "Dispensation of Conscience."

It didn't result in "love, mercy, and grace," as Tambora thinks it would.

It resulted in men becoming so wicked that God had to wipe them out.

Their women were laying with fallen angels, and having their children (the nephilim, the "giants in those days"). Their very genes had become corrupted, but only Noah (and by extension, his sons) was "perfect in his generations."

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand...

Because you are basically accusing God of injustice and God is righteousness personified, therefore He cannot be unjust.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Because you are basically accusing God of injustice

Where?

Be specific.

God withholding judgement, and not enforcing His righteous standard, and then later doing so, is injustice?

 

[Gary K]

Where?

Be specific.

God withholding judgement, and not enforcing His righteous standard, and then later doing so, is injustice?

Yes.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes.

Why?

 

[Gary K]

Why?

Because you are arguing fro ce that there was no law before the flood, and because God cannot be unjust. Both arguments cast a bad light upon God. I don't see a lot of difference between this argument and the Calvinist argument against no free will in that both make God appear unjust. There can be no justice without mercy.

Also how were Enoch and Noah were judged to be righteous if there was no standard of righteousness before the flood? To live up to it they had to know what it was,

Genesis 5: 21 ¶And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:*n5 22 And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters: 23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: 24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

Genesis 6: 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. 9 ¶These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Notice that both Enoch and Noah walked with God. Paul talks about walking with God too.

Galatians 5: 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Because you are arguing fro ce that

What?

 

[Gary K]

What?

LOL, My stroke got the better of me on that.

Arguing from silence.

 

[Tambora]

It didn't result in "love, mercy, and grace," as Tambora thinks it would.

I said no such thing concerning the flood.
Please learn to respond to what people actually said, and not what you think they said, or what you wanted them to say.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Arguing from silence.

Because you are arguing fro ce that there was no law before the flood,

No, I'm not arguing from silence.

Did you miss where I quoted Genesis 4? How God forbade the killing of Cain in punishment for his killing of his brother Abel? How Lamech said that He repaid the man who injured him "seventy-sevenfold" by killing him in retaliation?

Here it is again:

Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?”He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” And He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground. So now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. A fugitive and a vagabond you shall be on the earth.” And Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear! Surely You have driven me out this day from the face of the ground; I shall be hidden from Your face; I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth, and it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me.” And the Lord said to him, “Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him. Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad; and Irad begot Mehujael, and Mehujael begot Methushael, and Methushael begot Lamech. Then Lamech took for himself two wives: the name of one was Adah, and the name of the second was Zillah. And Adah bore Jabal. He was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal. He was the father of all those who play the harp and flute. And as for Zillah, she also bore Tubal-Cain, an instructor of every craftsman in bronze and iron. And the sister of Tubal-Cain was Naamah. Then Lamech said to his wives:“Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;Wives of Lamech, listen to my speech!For I have killed a man for wounding me,Even a young man for hurting me. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.”

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 4:8-24 - New King James Version

Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” And He said, “What have you done? The...

www.biblegateway.com

and because God cannot be unjust.

I've never said God was unjust.

In fact, I've stated the opposite, that God eventually enforced justice upon the earth, by wiping out humanity, which had become extremely wicked.

Both arguments cast a bad light upon God.

I've made no such arguments.

I don't see a lot of difference between this argument and the Calvinist argument against no free will in that both make God appear unjust.

My position doesn't make God appear unjust.

There can be no justice without mercy.

Because you say so?

Also how were Enoch and Noah were judged to be righteous

Because they walked with God.

if there was no standard of righteousness before the flood?

God was the standard of righteousness. Always has been. Always will be.

The law is simply the expression, or codification, of righteousness.

Between Genesis 3:23 and Genesis 8:19, God did not codify His law.

It doesn't mean that people couldn't be righteous. It just means there's no law of God given to men.

People were a law unto themselves, that "law" being righteous or not... In other words, they only obeyed their conscience, or ignored it. It was a "Dispensation of Conscience."

To live up to it they had to know what it was,

Do you think that humans back then didn't know about God?

Genesis 5: 21 ¶And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:*n5 22 And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters: 23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: 24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

Genesis 6: 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. 9 ¶These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Notice that both Enoch and Noah walked with God. Paul talks about walking with God too.

Galatians 5: 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

Supra.

The people who lived before the Flood (barring Noah and his family) did not walk with God.

And as a result, they gave into the lusts of the flesh, and the women laid with fallen angels, and had children who could not (yes, COULD NOT) walk with God, abominations called the nephilim (AKA the giants that walked the earth).

That's why Genesis 6:9 says "Noah . . . was perfect in his generations," because his genetics were pure, and free from corruption.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I said no such thing concerning the flood.

I was referring to your comment regarding how we should treat criminals today.

Please do try to follow the conversation.

How quickly some in Christ forget that and instead would rather revert back to holding others to the judgment of the law which is not of faith.

Tambora, to make things clear here, please answer the following question:

Do you believe that we (that is, modern human governments; I'm not talking about the Body of Christ, but rather of governmental responsibilities) should put to death those guilty of murder, adultery, kidnapping, rape, pedophilia, and/or other capital crimes?

 

[Gary K]

No, I'm not arguing from silence.

Did you miss where I quoted Genesis 4? How God forbade the killing of Cain in punishment for his killing of his brother Abel? How Lamech said that He repaid the man who injured him "seventy-sevenfold" by killing him in retaliation?

Here it is again:

Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?”He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” And He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground. So now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. A fugitive and a vagabond you shall be on the earth.” And Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is greater than I can bear! Surely You have driven me out this day from the face of the ground; I shall be hidden from Your face; I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth, and it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me.” And the Lord said to him, “Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him. Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad; and Irad begot Mehujael, and Mehujael begot Methushael, and Methushael begot Lamech. Then Lamech took for himself two wives: the name of one was Adah, and the name of the second was Zillah. And Adah bore Jabal. He was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal. He was the father of all those who play the harp and flute. And as for Zillah, she also bore Tubal-Cain, an instructor of every craftsman in bronze and iron. And the sister of Tubal-Cain was Naamah. Then Lamech said to his wives:“Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;Wives of Lamech, listen to my speech!For I have killed a man for wounding me,Even a young man for hurting me. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.”

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 4:8-24 - New King James Version

Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” And He said, “What have you done? The...

www.biblegateway.com

I've never said God was unjust.

In fact, I've stated the opposite, that God eventually enforced justice upon the earth, by wiping out humanity, which had become extremely wicked.



I've made no such arguments.



My position doesn't make God appear unjust.



Because you say so?



Because they walked with God.



God was the standard of righteousness. Always has been. Always will be.

The law is simply the expression, or codification, of righteousness.

Between Genesis 3:23 and Genesis 8:19, God did not codify His law.

It doesn't mean that people couldn't be righteous. It just means there's no law of God given to men.

People were a law unto themselves, that "law" being righteous or not... In other words, they only obeyed their conscience, or ignored it. It was a "Dispensation of Conscience."



Do you think that humans back then didn't know about God?



Supra.

The people who lived before the Flood (barring Noah and his family) did not walk with God.

And as a result, they gave into the lusts of the flesh, and the women laid with fallen angels, and had children who could not (yes, COULD NOT) walk with God, abominations called the nephilim (AKA the giants that walked the earth).

That's why Genesis 6:9 says "Noah . . . was perfect in his generations," because his genetics were pure, and free from corruption.

Yes you are arguing from silence as there arer no scriptures that say God had no law before the flood.

Yes, it is unjust because you're saying God treats some people different than others.

Colossians 1: 24 Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. 25 But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.

Ephesians 6: 8 Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. 9 And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

Acts 10: 34 ¶Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes you are arguing from silence

If I were making an argument from silence, my argument would be "because there is no scripture saying there was a law in the period between the fall and the leaving of the Ark, therefore there was no law."

But that's not the argument I'm making.

I'm saying, "because God prohibited the death penalty for Cain, there was no punishment for crimes (enforcement of a law) during the antediluvian period, and this is supported by the fact that Lamech killed a man for injuring him, a 'seventy-sevenfold' punishment, when it should have been only eye for eye, hand for hand, foot for foot, etc."

It's a positive argument based on evidence.

By definition, it is not an argument from silence.

as there are no scriptures that say God had no law before the flood.

THIS is an argument from silence! Hypocrite!

Yes, it is unjust because you're saying God treats some people different than others.

So God, for nearly 1700 years, didn't treat His people Israel differently than He did the Gentiles? He didn't treat Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob differently? He didn't treat His disciples differently during and shortly after his Earthly ministry?

In other words...

Yes, God does different things at different times with different people. That's what the Bible (and thus, what dispensationalism) teaches!

Colossians 1: 24 Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. 25 But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.

Ephesians 6: 8 Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. 9 And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

Acts 10: 34 ¶Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

Notice how ALL of those passages are from AFTER Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus.

That fits MY POSITION, not yours!

 

[Gary K]

If I were making an argument from silence, my argument would be "because there is no scripture saying there was a law in the period between the fall and the leaving of the Ark, therefore there was no law."

But that's not the argument I'm making.

I'm sayin, "because God prohibited the death penalty for Cain, there was no punishment for crimes (enforcement of a law) during the antediluvian period, and this is supported by the fact that Lamech killed a man for injuring him, a 'seventy-sevenfold' punishment, when it should have been only eye for eye, hand for hand, foot for foot, etc."

It's a positive argument based on evidence.

By definition, it is not an argument from silence.



THIS is an argument from silence! Hypocrite!



So God, for nearly 1700 years, didn't treat His people Israel differently than He did the Gentiles? He didn't treat Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob differently? He didn't treat His disciples differently during and shortly after his Earthly ministry?

In other words...

Yes, God does different things at different times with different people. That's what the Bible (and thus, what dispensationalism) teaches!



Notice how ALL of those passages are from AFTER Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus.

That fits MY POSITION, not yours!

Here is what you said.

Again, the point was that no law was in effect during the period mentioned.

I'm learning what dispensationalism teaches and that's one reason I quoted both Paul and Peter about God being no respecter of persons. From who you claim are from two different dispensations. Both men said the same thing.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I'm learning what dispensationalism teaches

Then you should already be aware that the common belief is that there are seven dispensations, and that there are different "house rules" (oikonomia) for each dispensation.

The rules for the dispensation of conscience was that there was no law on the earth, that men did according to their own desires.

and that's one reason I quoted both Paul and Peter about God being no respecter of persons.

God No Respecter Of Persons

In Romans 2:11 we read that "there is no respect of persons with God," and these very words, with slight variations, are found many times in the Bible. How wonderful! No "big wheels" with Him! Rather, all stand on the same footing before His bar of justice. Do you know why the kings in Israel's h

bereanbiblesociety.org

From who you claim are from two different dispensations. Both men said the same thing.

Dispensations that existed simultaneously. Are you trying to argue that someone from one dispensation can't recognize what another dispensation teaches? Because that's what happened with Peter, and is exactly what the passage you quoted shows.

Thanks for supporting my position!

 

[Gary K]

Then you should already be aware that the common belief is that there are seven dispensations, and that there are different "house rules" (oikonomia) for each dispensation.

The rules for the dispensation of conscience was that there was no law on the earth, that men did according to their own desires.

God No Respecter Of Persons

In Romans 2:11 we read that "there is no respect of persons with God," and these very words, with slight variations, are found many times in the Bible. How wonderful! No "big wheels" with Him! Rather, all stand on the same footing before His bar of justice. Do you know why the kings in Israel's h

bereanbiblesociety.org

Dispensations that existed simultaneously. Are you trying to argue that someone from one dispensation can't recognize what another dispensation teaches? Because that's what happened with Peter, and is exactly what the passage you quoted shows.

Thanks for supporting my position!

I don't support the ideas of dispensationalism. You can claim support all you like but I don't agree.

Some of the basis of how I view scripture is found in my thread on ga'al and the rest of it is based on the war between God and the devil since Satan was kicked out of heaven.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I don't support the ideas of dispensationalism. You can claim support all you like but I don't agree.

I don't care.

ALL I care about is the truth, and what the Bible says.

If you cannot make a valid argument against my position, you will not change my beliefs.

Some of the basis of how I view scripture is found in my thread on ga'al and the rest of it is based on the war between God and the devil since Satan was kicked out of heaven.

Yawn.