Featured Defending Biblical Dispensational Teaching. What Are Your Questions

While I am waiting for my first question, let me prove the different ages from the scriptures.

The scriptures explains that Jesus Christ came into the world in human form at the fullness of time. One must ask themselves if they believe that.The fullness of time was congruent with a harvest time, or the end of a growing season. I am not making this up. It is stated in the scriptures. His coming is also said to be at the end of the world.

While his coming is said to be the ending of one thing, it is said to be the beginning of something else. Look at this.

Ga 4:44 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

When, according to this statement, is the fullness of time? Answer: When God sent his Son into the world.
Asked another way; What did it mean when God sent Jesus Christ into the world? Answer; It meant it was the fullness of time.

Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;
2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

It is the end of the age, the fullness of time, but it is the beginning of the gospel of Christ. And why is it the beginning? Because John begins for the first time preaching Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world and this is the characteristic of the ages since.

What do we draw from this so far? We know that the coming of Jesus Christ was not the end of all time but it was the fullness of time (singular). We know that because 2000 years have passed since Jesus came and John began preaching him and time is still going on.

One must differentiate the plural and the singular nouns in the scriptures because they may mean different things. Like here, for instance.

Eph 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together (sounds like a harvest) in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; [even] in him:

Oops, there is a dispensation of the fullness of times, according to scriptures. Notice it is the fullness of times (plural). This means more than one time is involved in this prophecy.

Now, there is much more information that I could give here that strengthens what information I have given so far, but I am sure I will have opportunity to expand on this if anyone cares to respond.

Every Baptist living today should believe and teach the dispensational structure of the plan of God in redemption because it is what the book teaches and Baptists claim they are the people of the book.

If Jesus Christ came into the world while the law of Moses was still the operative principle of divine dealing with Israel, to whom he came, and Ga 4:4 says that is the truth, then one can logically say that is the time that is full and ready to change if he did not have scripture to say it. Fortunately we have scripture to say it.

Ro 10:4 For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Paul said this in 58 AD, twenty eight years after Jesus died and was buried and rose again.

Jesus had spoken these words about the law as an operative principle of God's dealing with Israel.

Mt 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

So now we know that the fullness of time and the end of the law means the same thing and both were accomplished by the sinless life of Christ and his subsequent death and resurrection. Obviously if one time ended and time is still continuing for 2000 more years, then it is logical to conclude that a new operative principle of divine dealing has taken place and we can say it is a new time with different godly principles of living.

This is one of my favorite bible subjects and I am anxious to talk some about it.

 

Adam and the garden is indeed a good place to begin speaking of the dispensational structure of God in time. The instruction and fellowship of God with Adam in the garden would have continued forever without Adam knowing good and evil experimentally and the tree of life would have been available to his offspring forever had not sin entered in. This changed the way Adam and God had fellowship and it changed the place of it. It also changed the principle of divine dealing with Adam and his offspring. The garden was still there with the tree of life in it but Adam could not meet with God there any longer. Cherubs and a flaming sword guarded the entrance to keep them from the tree of life lest they eat of the fruit of it and live forever.

So, the answer is both. God demonstrates his divine characteristics throughout history in his dispensational principles and at the end it is the same with man as at the beginning. Men fails but God does not. Read the last two chapters of the bible to see that all is restored as it was in the beginning.

 

God is faithful to his word, yes. That is what I am saying. If he gives promises in covenants then he is faithful to his covenants.

 

I see two or three things from your comments that could be framed into questions for someone who teaches dispensational theology.

1) How can Jews and gentiles both be in the body of Christ and remain separate and distinct outside the body of Christ?

2) Does the one new man in Ephesians equate to a modified and restructured "old man?"

Is that fair? If not, then rephrase them to be more in line with your thoughts.

Now, a question for you. Why would a future for the nation of Israel and the nations of the gentiles separate and apart from the church undo the work of Jesus on the cross?

 

I would like to have someone who is opposed to the dispensational structure of theology address why they are opposed to it. What do you think about my op? Is there anything that you disagree with in my comments about the scriptures I quoted and the reasoning I concluded?

I am a dispensationalist and I know why I am and can defend it from the scriptures, in context and systematically.

On the principle of faith in what God said at a particular time and how believing him relates to justification and salvation, I offer this in the same context that Paul, the apostle to us gentiles, offered it. It was in three categories in Romans 4. You can check me out.

1) Justification is by faith in what God said before the law of Moses was ever given - Abraham was the illustration
2) Justification is by faith in what God said to Israel after the law of Moses was the operative principle of his dealing with that people - David was the illustration
3) Justification by faith in what God says after the operative principle of Law was ended at the cross of Christ and his blood sacrifice was made efficacious to us gentiles, in addition to the Jews, by believing what God says to us. We are the illustration.

All groups are justified by faith in what God said to them. A justified sinner cannot be charged with sin. However, salvation is having one's sins washed away and that is what Jesus Christ does for a sinner ."without the shedding of blood is no remission" the scriptures say.

33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

Rom 4:23 Now it was not written for his (Abraham's) sake alone, that it (righteousness) was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it (righteousness) shall be imputed, if we believe on him (God the Father) that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

I am showing these scriptures to give you the statements that drives my reasoning