Progressive Disenchantment Atonement

[Right Divider]

Abraham justified by faith vs. Abraham justified by works

- Romans 4:2–3: "If Abraham was justified by works… but he wasn't."
- James 2:21 (not Paul, but relevant): "Was not Abraham justified by works?"

But even within Paul:

- Philippians 3:6: Paul says he was "blameless" in righteousness under the law, which contradicts his claim that no one can be righteous by the law.

MW, you are a very dim bulb...

Did you know that it's possible to keep the law and still not be counted as righteous because of it?

I'm not saying that someone can live without breaking the law. But the law included the requirements for restoring oneself by confessing, making restitution, making sacrifices, etc. etc. etc.

Of course, there were some violations of the law that required the death penalty... like murder.

The difference between Paul and James is the difference of DISPENSATION. God's "house rules" change sometimes and that is something that you seem to be completely unaware of.

 

[MWinther]

MW, you are a very dim bulb...

Did you know that it's possible to keep the law and still not be counted as righteous because of it?

I'm not saying that someone can live without breaking the law. But the law included the requirements for restoring oneself by confessing, making restitution, making sacrifices, etc. etc. etc.

Of course, there were some violations of the law that required the death penalty... like murder.

The difference between Paul and James is the difference of DISPENSATION. God's "house rules" change sometimes and that is something that you seem to be completely unaware of.

Dispensationalism is yet another nineteenth‑century heresy, born in the mind of John Nelson Darby. It insists on a rigid separation between Israel as an "earthly people" and the Church as a "heavenly people," but Scripture teaches no such thing. Paul speaks of one olive tree, not two (Romans 11). Ephesians 2-3 proclaims one new humanity, not parallel destinies. Galatians 3 eliminates ethnic distinctions within the Abrahamic promise.

Classical dispensationalism even claims that Israel is saved by obedience to the Law whereas the Church is saved by grace through faith. It fractures the unity of God's redemptive plan and creates multiple dispensations and multiple eschatological destinies. It reduces the Kingdom of God to a postponed political program, which contradicts Jesus' own teaching that the Kingdom is already present.

The system also breeds political fatalism. If the world must get worse before the rapture, then environmental care becomes pointless, social justice becomes secondary, and peace-making becomes irrelevant. Instead political conflicts become eschatological necessities, especially regarding modern Israel. War becomes a sign of prophetic fulfilment; peace efforts are sometimes resisted on theological grounds. The rapture expectation fosters escapism, a bunker mentality, and indifference to suffering.

Dispensationalism is the final stage of cosmological flattening. It removes divine presence from history, replaces sacramental participation with timelines, turns eschatology into a cosmic scheduling chart, and replaces pneumatology with prediction. It is the modern form of biblical fundamentalism, suppressing the symbolic, mythic, and metaphysical depth of Scripture. In truth, this is "religion as defense against the Holy Spirit." A dreadful heresy indeed.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Dispensationalism is yet another nineteenth‑century heresy, born in the mind of John Nelson Darby. It insists on a rigid separation between Israel as an "earthly people" and the Church as a "heavenly people," but Scripture teaches no such thing. Paul speaks of one olive tree, not two (Romans 11). Ephesians 2-3 proclaims one new humanity, not parallel destinies. Galatians 3 eliminates ethnic distinctions within the Abrahamic promise.

Classical dispensationalism even claims that Israel is saved by obedience to the Law whereas the Church is saved by grace through faith. It fractures the unity of God's redemptive plan and creates multiple dispensations and multiple eschatological destinies. It reduces the Kingdom of God to a postponed political program, which contradicts Jesus' own teaching that the Kingdom is already present.

The system also breeds political fatalism. If the world must get worse before the rapture, then environmental care becomes pointless, social justice becomes secondary, and peace-making becomes irrelevant. Instead political conflicts become eschatological necessities, especially regarding modern Israel. War becomes a sign of prophetic fulfilment; peace efforts are sometimes resisted on theological grounds. The rapture expectation fosters escapism, a bunker mentality, and indifference to suffering.

Dispensationalism is the final stage of cosmological flattening. It removes divine presence from history, replaces sacramental participation with timelines, turns eschatology into a cosmic scheduling chart, and replaces pneumatology with prediction. It is the modern form of biblical fundamentalism, suppressing the symbolic, mythic, and metaphysical depth of Scripture. In truth, this is "religion as defense against the Holy Spirit." A dreadful heresy indeed.

“Darby” is not an argument.

“Nineteenth century” is not an argument.

“Heresy” is not an argument.

“Political fatalism” is not an argument.

If dispensationalism is false, refute the distinctions from Scripture. Otherwise you are just denouncing the label because you cannot answer the verses.

Does Scripture itself distinguish Israel’s prophetic program from the mystery revealed through Paul?

Start with Romans 11, Ephesians 3, and Galatians 2.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

the final stage of cosmological flattening...

 

[Right Divider]

Dispensationalism is yet another nineteenth‑century heresy, born in the mind of John Nelson Darby.

Dispensationalism is in the Bible, so that's long before JND.

It insists on a rigid separation between Israel as an "earthly people" and the Church as a "heavenly people," but Scripture teaches no such thing.

It's interesting that you are wrong about just about everything. And not only wrong, but the exact opposite of the truth.

God separated Israel from all other people on the earth. Ex 33:12-16 Lev 20:22-26.

But the body of Christ is a heavenly people. Eph 1, 2, and 3.

Eph 1:10-12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:10) That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; [even] in him: (1:11) In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: (1:12) That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.​

Paul speaks of one olive tree, not two (Romans 11). Ephesians 2-3 proclaims one new humanity, not parallel destinies. Galatians 3 eliminates ethnic distinctions within the Abrahamic promise.

The olive tree is NOT talking about the body of Christ. It's talking about the nation of Israel..

Eph 2-3 is talking about the body of Christ, distinct from the nation of Israel.

You are trying to smash together things that God did not.

Classical dispensationalism even claims that Israel is saved by obedience to the Law whereas the Church is saved by grace through faith.

Again, a complete mischaracterization.

It fractures the unity of God's redemptive plan and creates multiple dispensations and multiple eschatological destinies. It reduces the Kingdom of God to a postponed political program, which contradicts Jesus' own teaching that the Kingdom is already present.

Utter nonsense.

The system also breeds political fatalism. If the world must get worse before the rapture, then environmental care becomes pointless, social justice becomes secondary, and peace-making becomes irrelevant. Instead political conflicts become eschatological necessities, especially regarding modern Israel. War becomes a sign of prophetic fulfilment; peace efforts are sometimes resisted on theological grounds. The rapture expectation fosters escapism, a bunker mentality, and indifference to suffering.

As always, your argument is against scripture:

2Tim 3:1-5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(3:1) This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. (3:2) For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, (3:3) Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, (3:4) Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; (3:5) Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.​

​

2Tim 3:12-13 (AKJV/PCE)​

(3:12) Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. (3:13) But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.​

Dispensationalism is the final stage of cosmological flattening.

Whatever that is, it's baloney.

It removes divine presence from history, replaces sacramental participation with timelines, turns eschatology into a cosmic scheduling chart, and replaces pneumatology with prediction. It is the modern form of biblical fundamentalism, suppressing the symbolic, mythic, and metaphysical depth of Scripture. In truth, this is "religion as defense against the Holy Spirit." A dreadful heresy indeed.

Everything that you say is utterly devoid of truth.

 

[Clete]

I am not proposing the reconstruction of a magisterium. I am simply identifying the causes that led to the spread of Protestant sectarianism.

Then, perhaps instead of trying to sound educated, you should try to communicate your ideas more clearly.

No, Luther was not faithful to Augustine. He dismantled Augustine's entire stratified Christian cosmos and flattened it completely.

This is an overstatement that cannot have been anything other than intentional. Luther's doctrine could hardly be any more saturated with Augustinianism if he tried!

Calvinism, which is just a more radical and more systematized version of Luther's doctrine is nothing at all other than Reformed Augustinianism.

Both Martin Luther and John Calvin stand firmly in the stream of Augustine of Hippo on the big issues...

• Human inability after the fall (i.e. total depravity)
• Salvation by grace, not human effort (i.e. predestination)
• The necessity of divine initiative (classical "sovereignty" (i.e. absolute control)
• Absolute divine immutability (which is the base premise for the whole system)

In short, all three men, Augustine, Luther and Calvin, all operate from the same premise and therefore believe very similar things. The only real difference is in how rigid one or the other is when applying the logic across their entire theological system.

In the catechism, Luther defines faith as personal trust in God's promise.

He also teaches...

"“I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Spirit has called me by the Gospel…” - from Luther's Small Catechism, in the explanation of the Third Article of the Apostles’ Creed.

In doing so, he abolishes the ancient and medieval emphasis on participation, the idea that the divine incarnation continues in the pious human being. One of the legs is cut away, and Christian faith hobbles on like a one‑legged man.

Another, probably copy/pasted, ridiculous overstatement. Luther did not remove participation. He removed participation as the basis of justification, and grounded it instead in union with Christ through faith. So what actually changes is not whether participation exists, but where it belongs in the order of salvation.

Unlike what Luther says, God is not entirely hidden, as if we could rely only on the God revealed in history. The angelic realm remains accessible through participation. But because Luther abolished this Pauline concept, Lutherans no longer have access to the living God. For Luther, God remains utterly hidden, effectively unreachable.

Nonsense. Purely a waste of time to even spend ten seconds thinking about.

You're on the edge of finding yourself on my ignore list.

 

[Right Divider]

Israel as God's People on Earth​

The Bible defines Israel as a distinct nation chosen for a specific earthly purpose.

• Deuteronomy 7:6: "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."
• Exodus 19:5 to 6: "Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation."
• Amos 3:2: "You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."

This earthly identity continues into the accounts of the four gospels. In Matthew 15:24, Jesus confirms his specific focus: "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." He further instructs his disciples in Matthew 10:5 to 6 to avoid the way of the Gentiles and the cities of the Samaritans, focusing strictly on the house of Israel.

---

The Contrast with the Body of Christ​

The Bible distinguishes the body of Christ from Israel by identifying it as a mystery that was previously hidden.

A New Revelation​

In Ephesians 3:1 to 6, the apostle Paul explains that the information regarding the body of Christ was "not made known unto the sons of men" in other ages. This contrasts with the prophecies concerning Israel. In Acts 3:21, Peter states that the things concerning Israel were spoken "by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." The prophetic program for Israel was known, while the mystery program for the body of Christ was kept secret.

Equality and Unity​

Israel required a "middle wall of partition" to remain separate from other nations. The body of Christ removes those distinctions.

• Ephesians 2:14 to 15: "For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace."
• Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Earthly vs. Heavenly Calling​

The Bible contrasts the locations of these two groups. God promised Israel an earthly kingdom under the New Covenant. He gives the body of Christ a heavenly position.

• Ephesians 1:3: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ."
• Colossians 3:1 to 2: "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth."

While Israel serves as God's people to represent him to the nations of the earth, you are part of a body that has its citizenship and blessings in heaven.

 

[MWinther]

Paul says that "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." You have chosen the opposite path, staking everything on the letter. Biblical literalism, combined with moral Manichaeism and a belief in being "chosen," produces not Christianity but an anti‑Christian movement, precisely the kind of posture Jesus and Paul opposed.

Throughout history, many religious and secular cultures have claimed a distinctive or even exceptional status for themselves. Ancient Jewish communities, Roman imperial ideology, Victorian English nationalism, and, in a darker register, Nazi racial mythology all framed their own people as uniquely significant, special, or "chosen." Chris Hedges, in American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, argues that the claim to be a uniquely "chosen people" is a recurring feature of fascist movements.

Communism, fascism, Nazism, and various modern ideological movements share a common structure: they elevate a rigid set of principles that must be obeyed to the letter, rather than cultivating the moral discernment of the heart that Paul speaks of. To this list we must also add American Christian fundamentalism, which in its literalism and authoritarian moralism aligns more closely with fascist patterns than with the Christianity of Jesus and Paul.

 

[Right Divider]

Let me start by saying that you are completely insane.

Paul says that "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." You have chosen the opposite path, staking everything on the letter.

Where do you get these utterly stupid ideas? Why don't you QUOTE us so that we have some idea of what you are even talking about?

Biblical literalism,

Again, that is a STRAW-MAN and NOT what we believe. We believe in reading the Bible naturally and normally. We take it like it says. If it's literal, we take it literally, if it's allegorical, we take it allegorically, if it's historical, we take it historically... etc. etc. etc.

combined with moral Manichaeism

That is another FALSE ACCUSATION from a pathological liar.

and a belief in being "chosen,"

Does God not chose people?

produces not Christianity but an anti‑Christian movement,

The only anti-Christian in this thread is you.

precisely the kind of posture Jesus and Paul opposed.

We agree with Jesus and Paul. Jesus called Paul.

Throughout history, many religious and secular cultures have claimed a distinctive or even exceptional status for themselves.

God chose the nation of Israel to be His people on the earth. That you cannot accept God's choices is your own personal problem

Deut 7:6-8 (AKJV/PCE)​

(7:6) 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. (7:7) 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: (7:8) 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.​

Ancient Jewish communities, Roman imperial ideology, Victorian English nationalism, and, in a darker register, Nazi racial mythology all framed their own people as uniquely significant, special, or "chosen."

You are crazy.

Chris Hedges, in American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America, argues that the claim to be a uniquely "chosen people" is a recurring feature of fascist movements.

Chris Hedges is a knucklehead with his bent towards a liberation theology hermeneutic. But what would we expect from the Presbyterian minister. They went off the rails years ago.

Communism, fascism, Nazism, and various modern ideological movements share a common structure: they elevate a rigid set of principles that must be obeyed to the letter, rather than cultivating the moral discernment of the heart that Paul speaks of.

Communism, fascism, Nazism, and various modern ideological movements are atheistic and are not compatible with Pauline Mid-Acts right division. So you are very far off the mark trying to smear us that way.

To this list we must also add American Christian fundamentalism, which in its literalism and authoritarian moralism aligns more closely with fascist patterns than with the Christianity of Jesus and Paul.

Again, your straw-man are easy targets.

What you need to do instead of beating them up is to get the plugs out of your ears and listen to what we are saying. Otherwise, AGAIN, you're just having an idiotic monologue with yourself.

 

[MWinther]

Let me start by saying that you are completely insane.

Where do you get these utterly stupid ideas? Why don't you QUOTE us so that we have some idea of what you are even talking about?

Again, that is a STRAW-MAN and NOT what we believe. We believe in reading the Bible naturally and normally. We take it like it says. If it's literal, we take it literally, if it's allegorical, we take it allegorically, if it's historical, we take it historically... etc. etc. etc.

That is another FALSE ACCUSATION from a pathological liar.

Does God not chose people?

The only anti-Christian in this thread is you.

We agree with Jesus and Paul. Jesus called Paul.

God chose the nation of Israel to be His people on the earth. That you cannot accept God's choices is your own personal problem

Deut 7:6-8 (AKJV/PCE)​

(7:6) 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. (7:7) 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: (7:8) 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.​

You are crazy.

Chris Hedges is a knucklehead with his bent towards a liberation theology hermeneutic. But what would we expect from the Presbyterian minister. They went off the rails years ago.

Communism, fascism, Nazism, and various modern ideological movements are atheistic and are not compatible with Pauline Mid-Acts right division. So you are very far off the mark trying to smear us that way.

Again, your straw-man are easy targets.

What you need to do instead of beating them up is to get the plugs out of your ears and listen to what we are saying. Otherwise, AGAIN, you're just having an idiotic monologue with yourself.

Literalistic fundamentalism treats a sacred text as inerrant in every detail, self‑interpreting, and immune to historical, linguistic, or contextual analysis. This is remarkably naïve, because all reading is interpretation; there is no such thing as an "objective" frame of mind. Gadamer explicitly rejects the idea of an objective standpoint: all understanding is shaped by historical horizons and "prejudices" are conditions of understanding.

This naïve approach produces an epistemology with authoritarian tendencies: truth is not discovered but decreed; interpretation becomes obedience rather than inquiry; dissent is framed as rebellion rather than dialogue (as this conversation illustrates).

Literalistic fundamentalism offers clarity instead of complexity, certainty instead of discernment, and rules instead of wisdom. This creates a psychological environment that mirrors fascist dynamics: ambiguity is treated as threat, nuance as weakness, and critical thinking as disloyalty (again evident in this exchange).

The result is a mindset predisposed to follow strong leaders who promise order, purity, and simplicity. Literalistic systems divide the world into insiders and outsiders, the pure and the impure, the faithful and the enemies. This purity logic parallels fascist ideology, where identity becomes absolute, difference becomes danger, and community becomes fortress.

Literalistic fundamentalism elevates a single text, interpreted by a single tradition, enforced by a single authority. This mirrors the political structure of fascism: centralized authority, uniformity of thought, and suppression of dissent (as this conversation demonstrates). The theological form is "one text, one truth, one voice"; the political analogue is "one nation, one leader, one will."

Ethically, literalism reduces morality to rule‑keeping, boundary‑policing, and conformity. It produces legalism instead of compassion, punishment instead of restoration, and obedience instead of conscience, and this is precisely what Jesus and Paul opposed. Fascist movements have historically thrived where moral agency is outsourced to an external authority, yet genuine morality arises from the heart.

Hermeneutically, literalism collapses Scripture into propositions, predictions, and technical instructions. It destroys metaphor, symbol, mythic depth, and participatory imagination. A flattened symbolic world is easier to control, and fascist movements often suppress symbolic richness because it nurtures independent thought and interior freedom.

Ultimately, literalism evacuates divine presence from the world. It replaces living Spirit with static text. It turns religion into a system of control rather than participation. It becomes, in effect, "religion as defense against the Holy Spirit."

This is why literalistic fundamentalism can drift towards authoritarian or fascist patterns: it seeks safety in rigidity rather than transformation in the Spirit.

 

[Right Divider]

Literalistic fundamentalism treats a sacred text as inerrant in every detail,

You've yet to provide an error in the scripture.

self‑interpreting,

I don't know anyone that says that. But the scripture is written to be understood.

and immune to historical, linguistic, or contextual analysis.

Baloney, another of your steady stream of false accusations.

This is remarkably naïve, because all reading is interpretation; there is no such thing as an "objective" frame of mind.

AGAIN, with your STRAW-MAN arguments. Nobody has made such a claim here.

Gadamer explicitly rejects the idea of an objective standpoint: all understanding is shaped by historical horizons and "prejudices" are conditions of understanding.

You sure to have a long list of authorities that you worship.

If you'd like to start actually discussing something, let us know. So far all you are doing is:

• Talking to yourself
• Making false accusations about what we believe
• Going off on tangents completely unrelated to what any of us has said
• Referring to many "authorities" that we don't care about

AGAIN, let me tell you that we read the Bible NATURALLY and NORMALLY. We do NOT force a "literalism" on the text (unlike you who forces allegoricalism on all of it).

We read the literal parts literally, we read the allegorical parts allegorically, we read the poetic parts poetically, we read the historical part historically, etc. etc. etc.