ECT What is your view of MAD and MADists? (Strictly for people who are not mad)

[andyc]

Madists please respect the fact that this thread is not for you.

I'm wondering what non mad evangelical christians think of mad.
Do you see it as as a harmless modern opinion of grace with a overweighted interest in Darby flavored eschatology?
Do you see it as a dangerous movement that is more cultish than Christian?

I'm really wanting you to nail your colors to the mast here with an honest opinion.
I'm going to be brutally honest and say that I don't think mad is harmless. I think it's extremely cultish, and should be warned against among fellow evangelicals.
The denial of repentance, water baptism, the born again experience, and removal of two thirds of the new testament directly applying to christians today, makes mad a cult. A gnostic style cult at that.

You may disagree, but don't shrink back from telling us what you really think, even if you're friendly with these people. What do you really think about mad?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

:shut:

 

[andyc]

:shut:

You couldn't resist. Could you? I knew it would be hard for you, and I'm not expecting many responses in this thread, but if you Mads could sit back and observe, I'd be impressed.

Do you see me in your theology club threads?

No I respect the rules.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

:rotfl:

 

[andyc]

:rotfl:

Another one who fails to respect the request in the OP.
This one is supposed to have me on ignore BTW.

 

[ebenz47037]

I'm not MAD. But, I'm an open theist. In other words, I believe the future is open and mostly determined by man's choices. I've met quite a few TOLers who are MAD. I don't agree with everything they believe. But, I do agree with the majority of what they believe. I don't think MAD is anymore dangerous than my own beliefs. I think that as long as we can agree that Christ is our Savior, the rest will get straightened out in the end when we sit at His feet, learning the Truth from Him.

 

[whitestone]

Madists please respect the fact that this thread is not for you.

I'm wondering what non mad evangelical christians think of mad.
Do you see it as as a harmless modern opinion of grace with a overweighted interest in Darby flavored eschatology?
Do you see it as a dangerous movement that is more cultish than Christian?

I'm really wanting you to nail your colors to the mast here with an honest opinion.
I'm going to be brutally honest and say that I don't think mad is harmless. I think it's extremely cultish, and should be warned against among fellow evangelicals.
The denial of repentance, water baptism, the born again experience, and removal of two thirds of the new testament directly applying to christians today, makes mad a cult. A gnostic style cult at that.

You may disagree, but don't shrink back from telling us what you really think, even if you're friendly with these people. What do you really think about mad?

lol, just from sheer curiosity who do you consider to be M.A.D.? Are they Baptist,Catholics,Presbyterians? Exactly who are you referring to,those on this forum or are there others that you feel this way about outside of TOL?

 

[Nang]

Madists please respect the fact that this thread is not for you.

I'm wondering what non mad evangelical christians think of mad.
Do you see it as as a harmless modern opinion of grace with a overweighted interest in Darby flavored eschatology?
Do you see it as a dangerous movement that is more cultish than Christian?

I'm really wanting you to nail your colors to the mast here with an honest opinion.
I'm going to be brutally honest and say that I don't think mad is harmless. I think it's extremely cultish, and should be warned against among fellow evangelicals.
The denial of repentance, water baptism, the born again experience, and removal of two thirds of the new testament directly applying to christians today, makes mad a cult. A gnostic style cult at that.

You may disagree, but don't shrink back from telling us what you really think, even if you're friendly with these people. What do you really think about mad?

Any system of dispensationalism is a delusion meant to distract souls from centering their minds and hopes upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ. MADists are hyper-dispensationalists, in that they claim only a small portion of the Holy Scriptures contains His Gospel, and omit the rest as not pertaining to His church.

It would take a book to list my objections to this movement . . .

The warning prophecy of II Thessalonians Chapter Two is applicable to your OP.

 

[whitestone]

Any system of dispensationalism is a delusion meant to distract souls from centering their minds and hopes upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ. MADists are hyper-dispensationalists, in that they claim only a small portion of the Holy Scriptures contains His Gospel, and omit the rest as not pertaining to His church.

It would take a book to list my objections to this movement . . .

The warning prophecy of II Thessalonians Chapter Two is applicable to your OP.

Do you believe that their was an "old testament" and that their is a "new testament"? Do you believe that one has ended and you are now living under another? Do you believe that the "New" was offered and refused and then something else began?

 

[Nang]

Any system of dispensationalism is a delusion meant to distract souls from centering their minds and hopes upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ. MADists are hyper-dispensationalists, in that they claim only a small portion of the Holy Scriptures contains His Gospel, and omit the rest as not pertaining to His church.

It would take a book to list my objections to this movement . . .

The warning prophecy of II Thessalonians Chapter Two is applicable to your OP.

Heh . . .

If any here worry about their reputations, do not answer Andy, for I received my first neg rep within seconds of posting the above.

I could care less about the rep system, and am amused enough by the fast reaction, to feel it worthwhile to repeat my post.

 

[Nang]

Do you believe that their was an "old testament" and that their is a "new testament"? Do you believe that one has ended and you are now living under another? Do you believe that the "New" was offered and refused and then something else began?

Old and New Testaments are not old and new dispensations of Gospel Truth. The Gospel is revealed from Genesis to Revelation, as is the eternal and holy Law of God. In fact, the bible in its entirety IS the Gospel and the Law.

You will need to clarify what "New" thing you believe was offered and refused.

 

[whitestone]

Old and New Testaments are not old and new dispensations of Gospel Truth. The Gospel is revealed from Genesis to Revelation, as is the eternal and holy Law of God. In fact, the bible in its entirety IS the Gospel and the Law.

You will need to clarify what "New" thing you believe was offered and refused.

the Old covenant(Moses) and the New. do you believe you are bound to accomplish the old or are you now under another?

 

[Nang]

the Old covenant(Moses) and the New. do you believe you are bound to accomplish the old or are you now under another?

The Mosaic Covenant was a reiteration of the original covenant of creation, the Covenant of Works, made by God with Adam before the fall.

There are two Covenants. The old Covenant of Works and the new Covenant of Grace.

Within these two, all covenants subsist.

All persons born of Adam come into the world under the old Covenant of Works, and remain condemned as covenant-breakers because no man can keep the Laws of God. Romans 3:9-20

However, to remedy the fall and to save souls, God made a new Covenant of Grace with Eve, promising her a "Seed" that would be born from her. Genesis 3:15 This is the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the promise of His eventual Incarnation, and victory over the devil and death.

Thus, both Covenants have condemned and/or brought grace to mankind since the beginning, through the two Adams. This is the teaching of Romans 5:12-21

 

[whitestone]

The Mosaic Covenant was a reiteration of the original covenant of creation, the Covenant of Works, made by God with Adam before the fall.

There are two Covenants. The old Covenant of Works and the new Covenant of Grace.

Within these two, all covenants subsist.

All persons born of Adam come into the world under the old Covenant of Works, and remain condemned as covenant-breakers because no man can keep the Laws of God. Romans 3:9-20

However, to remedy the fall and to save souls, God made a new Covenant of Grace with Eve, promising her a "Seed" that would be born from her. Genesis 3:15 This is the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the promise of His eventual Incarnation, and victory over the devil and death.

Thus, both Covenants have condemned and/or brought grace to mankind since the beginning, through the two Adams. This is the teaching of Romans 5:12-21

You separated it into "two parts" First "before the fall" then "after the fall" still two things,two different covenants between God and man.

Now "after the flood" Shem,Ham and Japeth entered into another covenant with God from then till when?

Abram was separated out of Shems tribe and another was made with him but not with the remainder of his(Shem's)tribe and so Ham,Japeth and the remainder of Shems tribe remained under which covenant?

 

[john w]

A gnostic style cult at that.

1.Plagiarizing spam-again:


http://www.answersinrevelation.org/gnostic_roots.pdf

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2011/06/is-left-behind-theology-gnostic/

2. A summary of this thread:

Are you still beating your wife?

 

[Nihilo]

I'm really wanting you to nail your colors to the mast here with an honest opinion.
I'm going to be brutally honest and say that I don't think mad is harmless. I think it's extremely cultish, and should be warned against among fellow evangelicals.
The denial of repentance, water baptism, the born again experience, and removal of two thirds of the new testament directly applying to christians today, makes mad a cult. A gnostic style cult at that.

You may disagree, but don't shrink back from telling us what you really think, even if you're friendly with these people. What do you really think about mad?

As far as I can tell, each MADist here is a true Christian. I disagree fundamentally that MADism is, or can be a cult. I see it as a theological school of thought. (My standard for orthodoxy, is explicitly what the papacy, pope, Holy See, magisterium, Catholic Church, Holy Catholic Church and Church teach in matters of faith, doctrine and morals, entirely expressed within the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and so I don't view MADism particularly, as any more or less heretical or harmful than any other non-Catholic Christian view that believes in the Lord Jesus Christ.) I believe there's only one correct and accurate expression of the historical Christian faith, and that expression is the Catechism.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

You expect to stand behind a tree and throw rocks at people as they walk by and have immunity by saying: "Nobody has a right to complain about it." I believe you're being a bit naive. MAD believers are those who have heard the Gospel and placed their faith in Christ as their Savior. They also believe that God gave Paul a "Special Message" to take to the Gentiles while Peter and the rest continued to take Christ's "Kingdom Message" to the House of Israel. (Jews if you prefer) Today, both Jew and Gentile alike are under the "Grace Gospel" that was given to Paul to preach to the Gentiles. There is no "Kingdom Gospel" today. We are now living in the "Dispensation of Grace" as Paul so aptly named it. We are ALL saved by faith alone without works.

 

[john w]

candyandy's hired gun:

View attachment 24722

 

[Nang]

You separated it into "two parts"

"It" what?

First "before the fall" then "after the fall" still two things,

What two things? Same day. Same God. Same people. Same devil.

two different covenants between God and man.

Correct, both established within the same time and era. Both part of the eternal and everlasting Covenant that was established by creation, law, and grace.

Now "after the flood" Shem,Ham and Japeth entered into another covenant with God from then till when?

Shem proved to be under the new Covenant of Grace and the others remained condemned under the Covenant of Works (Law).

Abram was separated out of Shems tribe and another was made with him

The Abrahamic covenant is the result and part of the new Covenant of Grace.

but not with the remainder of his(Shem's)tribe and so Ham,Japeth and the remainder of Shems tribe remained under which covenant?

Right. As said, these remained condemned under the Covenant of Works.

There are only two Covenants. One of Law and the other of Gospel. These have existed simultaneously since the beginning.

Dispensationalists bring confusion into Covenant Theology, by insisting on numerous differences in eras of time, where it is claimed all kinds of doctrines change, come, and go. Not so.

From the beginning, all souls are condemned under the Law (Ephesians 2:1-3) unless and until God in His mercy and grace forgives them through faith under the new Covenant of Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 2:4-10)

This saving miracle has been performed and fulfilled by God since the days of Abel. Genesis 4:4 Many of the saints saved by the grace of God through faith, prior to the Incarnation, are listed in Hebrews Chapter 11.

Some things can be different while still the same . . .

The Law, the Gospel, and God's saving grace never changes.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Peter and the rest of the Apostles preached the "Kingdom Gospel" to the Jews. It was based on, faith in Christ and works. Paul's Gospel to the Gentiles was faith without works. The Gentiles had NEVER been under the Law. The Jews were God's "Chosen People." Two thousand years ago Gentiles were considered to be as Dogs.

Christ stated in Matthew 15:24 "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Christ came as their Messiah. His message was ONLY to the House of Israel and didn't include the Gentiles. After Christ died and was resurrected, He Ascended to sit down at the right hand of the Father, in Heaven. One day He met Paul on the road to Damascus and subsequently gave Paul the "Grace Gospel" to take to the Jew first and after which, Paul became the "Apostle to the Gentiles." Paul ONLY preached the Gospel that the "Ascended Lord Jesus Christ" gave him to preach. That same Gospel is what saves both Jew and Gentile today in 2016 and beyond.