Dispensationalism
- Thread starter Pamella
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Hi BibleGuy,
He already restored it during the first century reformation. What time period did he restore it to makes a good bible study?
I say the period of the judges. This was before there was an outward representative(kings fathers etc.) and men walked by faith (the unseen eternal) in respect to the King who has no form.as one the Kings of kings and Lord of lords.
The fleshly ordinances without fail are applied to the “flesh” as that seen, the temporal.... not the spirit of the matter, the eternal not seen.
Remember Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God still speaks in figures or parables called walking by faith (the unseen) without them he speaks not to the multitude. This is every one that hears the word of God. Some mix faith in what they do hear (the new creatures in Christ) while natural man is not given the spiritual understanding. The key that unlocks the gates of hell is to walk by faith as the things of God and not by sight ( ceremonial laws) as the things of men.(Ultimately no man can serve two masters)
2Co 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen “are temporal”; but the things which are not seen “are eternal”.
In doing so the Spirit of Christ hid the spiritual meaning from those whose hope is they could be found with a righteousness of their own selves. As if they could keep the whole law without stumbling at any point as in never sinning.
Christians find themselves under the “law of Liberty” (grace and mercy ) Amen? And not the law that points to death and destruction never to raise to new incorruptible spirit life forever more.
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty Jam 2:10
Poster wrote...So, what's the purpose?
The Old Testament sacrifices that were used as figures/parables up until the first century reformation where necessary as a show that became the true demonstration of the lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world .This was before he rested on the 7th .... the Sabbath rest all believers enter into by the faith of Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God.
Ceremonial law in respect to the temporal as that seen do not equal as a sign what they point to as a shadow the unseen. Sings point they do not become what they are pointing to.
It was because of that that misunderstanding of ceremonial laws that first century reformation came.
No man, to include your own self can keep the whole law of God perfectly without stumbling in the least And the wage of the least is still (eternal separation from God never to rise to new spirit life forever more )
When you say the future? Is it in regard to the eternal land, the new heavens and earth not seen, the heavenly Jerusalem or called Zion seeing it’s the end of the matter. Or are you speaking of the temporal as that seen the earthly Jerusalem that will go up in smoke when the incorruptible comes into view?
It’s the reformed priesthood the reformation has come. All believers are considered priest typified by the Leviticus priesthood as they hold out the gospel of peace, as ambassadors for Christ. Are you saying Christians are not considered kingdom of priest after the order of Melchizedek.
That fact is there is no need to believe ceremonial laws can take away even one sin in respect to "eternal" separation from God ,never to come to new spirit life again .Again those kind of laws never took away in one sin as a whole life without sin.
I think its the reason he gave us the book of Hebrews to show those who are trusting in shadows hoping they could provide the spiritual substance to forgive the eternal wage of sin.
Which was a figure (parable) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them “until” the time of reformation.But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: Heb 9:13
Strongs lexiicon 3850 parabole {par-ab-ol-ay'}
from 3846; TDNT - 5:744,773; n f
AV - parable 46, figure 2, comparison 1, proverb 1; 50
1) a placing of one thing by the side of another, juxtaposition, as of ships in battle 2) metaph. 2a) a comparing, comparison of one thing with another, likeness, similitude 2b) an example by which a doctrine or precept is illustrated 2c) a narrative, fictitious but agreeable to the laws and usages of human life, by which either the duties of men or the things of God, particularly the nature and history of God's kingdom are figuratively portrayed 2d) a parable: an earthly story with a heavenly meaning 3) a pithy and instructive saying, involving some likeness or comparison and having preceptive or admonitory force 3a) an aphorism, a maxim 4) a proverb 5) an act by which one exposes himself or his possessions to danger, a venture, a risk
He already restored it during the first century reformation. What time period did he restore it to makes a good bible study?
I say the period of the judges. This was before there was an outward representative(kings fathers etc.) and men walked by faith (the unseen eternal) in respect to the King who has no form.as one the Kings of kings and Lord of lords.
The fleshly ordinances without fail are applied to the “flesh” as that seen, the temporal.... not the spirit of the matter, the eternal not seen.
Remember Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God still speaks in figures or parables called walking by faith (the unseen) without them he speaks not to the multitude. This is every one that hears the word of God. Some mix faith in what they do hear (the new creatures in Christ) while natural man is not given the spiritual understanding. The key that unlocks the gates of hell is to walk by faith as the things of God and not by sight ( ceremonial laws) as the things of men.(Ultimately no man can serve two masters)
2Co 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen “are temporal”; but the things which are not seen “are eternal”.
In doing so the Spirit of Christ hid the spiritual meaning from those whose hope is they could be found with a righteousness of their own selves. As if they could keep the whole law without stumbling at any point as in never sinning.
Christians find themselves under the “law of Liberty” (grace and mercy ) Amen? And not the law that points to death and destruction never to raise to new incorruptible spirit life forever more.
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty Jam 2:10
Poster wrote...So, what's the purpose?
The Old Testament sacrifices that were used as figures/parables up until the first century reformation where necessary as a show that became the true demonstration of the lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world .This was before he rested on the 7th .... the Sabbath rest all believers enter into by the faith of Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God.
Ceremonial law in respect to the temporal as that seen do not equal as a sign what they point to as a shadow the unseen. Sings point they do not become what they are pointing to.
It was because of that that misunderstanding of ceremonial laws that first century reformation came.
No man, to include your own self can keep the whole law of God perfectly without stumbling in the least And the wage of the least is still (eternal separation from God never to rise to new spirit life forever more )
When you say the future? Is it in regard to the eternal land, the new heavens and earth not seen, the heavenly Jerusalem or called Zion seeing it’s the end of the matter. Or are you speaking of the temporal as that seen the earthly Jerusalem that will go up in smoke when the incorruptible comes into view?
It’s the reformed priesthood the reformation has come. All believers are considered priest typified by the Leviticus priesthood as they hold out the gospel of peace, as ambassadors for Christ. Are you saying Christians are not considered kingdom of priest after the order of Melchizedek.
That fact is there is no need to believe ceremonial laws can take away even one sin in respect to "eternal" separation from God ,never to come to new spirit life again .Again those kind of laws never took away in one sin as a whole life without sin.
I think its the reason he gave us the book of Hebrews to show those who are trusting in shadows hoping they could provide the spiritual substance to forgive the eternal wage of sin.
Which was a figure (parable) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them “until” the time of reformation.But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: Heb 9:13
Strongs lexiicon 3850 parabole {par-ab-ol-ay'}
from 3846; TDNT - 5:744,773; n f
AV - parable 46, figure 2, comparison 1, proverb 1; 50
1) a placing of one thing by the side of another, juxtaposition, as of ships in battle 2) metaph. 2a) a comparing, comparison of one thing with another, likeness, similitude 2b) an example by which a doctrine or precept is illustrated 2c) a narrative, fictitious but agreeable to the laws and usages of human life, by which either the duties of men or the things of God, particularly the nature and history of God's kingdom are figuratively portrayed 2d) a parable: an earthly story with a heavenly meaning 3) a pithy and instructive saying, involving some likeness or comparison and having preceptive or admonitory force 3a) an aphorism, a maxim 4) a proverb 5) an act by which one exposes himself or his possessions to danger, a venture, a risk
???????
Originally posted by Budman:
"I believe God deals with different people/nations in different periods of time. And has revealed different aspects of Himself over time.Pretty straightforward."
Originally Posted by crossnote
"The core of dispensationalism is twofold.
1. A literal approach to Scripture.
2. A distinction between Israel and the Church.
I hold to both"
Originally posted by Budman:
"I believe God deals with different people/nations in different periods of time. And has revealed different aspects of Himself over time.Pretty straightforward."
Originally Posted by crossnote
"The core of dispensationalism is twofold.
1. A literal approach to Scripture.
2. A distinction between Israel and the Church.
I hold to both"
Once you get beyond the above basics a lot of us will probably disagree (and some disagree before these basics!
)I personally think that a key is to keep the nation of Israel and the church as distinct. The Old Testament was a time period God dealt with the Jews as a nation. The "time of the Gentiles" began from the resurrection/Pentecost until the coming Rapture of the Church. Then during the 7 year tribulation period God will again be dealing with the Jewish nation. Saints in these three eras are treated differently, though salvation in any time period is only through Jesus Christ.
Where I think we need to be careful, though, is to not starting cutting up the New Testament and relegate certain parts of it to people of a different time period. All of the New Testement is for saints today.
Seriously?
Come on now...Dan! I hope you're joking.
Think about it....I guess Paul was full of TRANSGRESSION because he spoke until midnight when someone even fell asleep out of a window? (Ac. 20:7-9)
Of course not!
And Paul's discourse that evening would have been MUCH longer than my post.
You have not properly understood the genre exemplified in the Proverbs...
Let's be careful.
FURTHERMORE, the very Scripture (Pr. 10:19) you've quoted merely confirms my position:
It is wise to avoid transgression (Heb. “pesha”, Pr. 10:19). “Pesha” translates to “anomia” in Greek (compare Ps. 32:1 with Rom. 4:7). “Anomia” is lawlessness (Torah-lessness). Thus, “pesha” is violation of the Torah. It follows that it is wise to avoid violation of the Torah. Christians should, thus, be wise and obey the Torah.
best....
BibleGuy
Careful, crossnote, the HRM guy is liking your posts .
Read that Ezek passage again and look at the conditional nature of it. Lots of ifs and thens. The ifs didn't happen; so the thens didn't happen.
-JGIG
.Read that Ezek passage again and look at the conditional nature of it. Lots of ifs and thens. The ifs didn't happen; so the thens didn't happen.
-JGIG
(for example: http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/137602-dispensationalism-7.html#post2666538 )
And, she hasn't told you that the Hebrew for "if" (i.e., "im") can also be translated as "when" (e.g., Ge. 38:9).
And, she wants you to think that Eze. 40-47 will not happen because she claims the Israelites did not be ashamed of their iniquities (Eze. 43:11).
This is wrong! Why? Because Ezekiel already GUARANTEED that the Israelites WILL (in the FUTURE) be ashamed (Eze. 36:22) and cleansed from all iniquities (Eze. 36:23).
So, Eze. 36 GUARANTEES that Eze. 40-47 will be fulfilled, IN THE FUTURE.
Israel WILL be ashamed of all iniquities, and will return to the land (Eze. 36:24), with the indwelling Holy SPIRIT (Eze. 36:27) who leads us to do what? OBEY YHVH's statutes and ordinances (Eze. 36:27), just as Moses likewise prophesied that all Torah would be obeyed after we return to the land (Dt. 30:1-8). (This has NOT yet happened!)
And WHERE are these statutes and ordinances contained? Answer: The written Torah of Moses (1 Ki. 2:3).
And what does Ezekiel PROMISE when these Israelites finally show they are ashamed of their iniquities? Levitical sacrifical ceremonial activity! (Eze. 40-47.....the very thing JGIG is trying to explain away as "never going to happen".)
Isaiah AGREES that there will be future Levitical activity associated with Sabbath and New Moon (Is. 66:21-23), and Ezekiel agrees (Eze. 46:1-6)....but JGIG does not want you to believe this.
Jeremiah AGREES that there will be future Levitical activity (Jer. 33) when Israel and Judah are finally reunited, in fulfillment of the Davidic and Abrahamic covenants...but JGIG does not want you to believe this.
John says the tree leaves on the river bank are for healing (Rev. 22:2), and Ezekiel AGREES (Eze. 47:12)....but JGIG wants you to think that Eze. 40-47 will never happen.
Sigh....
Perhaps she will now acknowledge that her position is disconfirmed?
blessings...
BibleGuy
It's interesting to note that when someone has an off-the-wall doctrine or biblical explanation, such as a "church in the wilderness", they always choose the KJV.
Perhaps educated & uneducated alike should write this down somewhere when it happens & come to the simple conclusion that the KJV is good for starting false doctrine due to its misrepresentation of the truth by its "producers" to rebel from the RCC, which were heretical from the start.
If the genuine purpose for a Bible translation was to rebel from the RCC, allow a king divorce his wife, & allow full authority to the Archbishop of Canterbury to be a "head" over the new Church of England, then WHY do we continue to "authorize" our doctrine with it? One might as well use a comic book.
Perhaps educated & uneducated alike should write this down somewhere when it happens & come to the simple conclusion that the KJV is good for starting false doctrine due to its misrepresentation of the truth by its "producers" to rebel from the RCC, which were heretical from the start.
If the genuine purpose for a Bible translation was to rebel from the RCC, allow a king divorce his wife, & allow full authority to the Archbishop of Canterbury to be a "head" over the new Church of England, then WHY do we continue to "authorize" our doctrine with it? One might as well use a comic book.
but those chapters had a literal fulfilment in the Temple that God sent down from Heaven in Ezekiel's day which was only visible to those who could 'see' (as Elisha saw the heavenly hosts around him). Ezekiel saw it and walked round it. It was a guarantee to those still left that God was still with them. The water that flowed from the Temple portrayed the return from Exile and God's Spirit moving among them.
It's interesting to note that when someone has an off-the-wall doctrine or biblical explanation, such as a "church in the wilderness", they always choose the KJV.
Perhaps educated & uneducated alike should write this down somewhere when it happens & come to the simple conclusion that the KJV is good for starting false doctrine due to its misrepresentation of the truth by its "producers" to rebel from the RCC, which were heretical from the start.
If the genuine purpose for a Bible translation was to rebel from the RCC, allow a king divorce his wife, & allow full authority to the Archbishop of Canterbury to be a "head" over the new Church of England, then WHY do we continue to "authorize" our doctrine with it? One might as well use a comic book.
Perhaps educated & uneducated alike should write this down somewhere when it happens & come to the simple conclusion that the KJV is good for starting false doctrine due to its misrepresentation of the truth by its "producers" to rebel from the RCC, which were heretical from the start.
If the genuine purpose for a Bible translation was to rebel from the RCC, allow a king divorce his wife, & allow full authority to the Archbishop of Canterbury to be a "head" over the new Church of England, then WHY do we continue to "authorize" our doctrine with it? One might as well use a comic book.
How does one worship the bible? Like light candles to it, kiss it, bow down before it?
We are to lay up his words in our heart not set up idols in it, so if his words are supposed to be there I dont see how his words can be of an evil idolatry. One worships him in obedience to his words, how does one worship words (as if bowing to them over Him)?
I never got that
We are to lay up his words in our heart not set up idols in it, so if his words are supposed to be there I dont see how his words can be of an evil idolatry. One worships him in obedience to his words, how does one worship words (as if bowing to them over Him)?
I never got that
Hi BibleGuy,
Yes Paul like any born again believer remained a transgressor all the days of his life on earth .No one can keep the law perfectly without stumbling as if one could be found with a righteousness of their own by keeping it perfectly.. And it would seem you are staying away from looking at the temporal use of the ceremonial laws that were necessary up until the reformation but did not because they could not take away even the least of sin.
The first century reformation had come .What time period to you think it was restored to? And by looking at the parable below which was a figure for the time present. How do we eat and drink spiritually .Can the food that goes in our mouth enters our stomach and comes out as draught perform any spiritual work of quickening a person soul? The Catholic believe it can. What was the purpose for that figure/parable
Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them “until the time of reformation”. Heb 9:9
Is it still imposed and if so explain why ?
Yes Paul like any born again believer remained a transgressor all the days of his life on earth .No one can keep the law perfectly without stumbling as if one could be found with a righteousness of their own by keeping it perfectly.. And it would seem you are staying away from looking at the temporal use of the ceremonial laws that were necessary up until the reformation but did not because they could not take away even the least of sin.
The first century reformation had come .What time period to you think it was restored to? And by looking at the parable below which was a figure for the time present. How do we eat and drink spiritually .Can the food that goes in our mouth enters our stomach and comes out as draught perform any spiritual work of quickening a person soul? The Catholic believe it can. What was the purpose for that figure/parable
Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them “until the time of reformation”. Heb 9:9
Is it still imposed and if so explain why ?
Hello garee,
Dan misused Pr. 10:19 by apparently implying that my post(s) are too long.
I pointed out that Dan misused Pr. 10:19.
I pointed out that (according to Dan's reasoning which apparently requires that our posts only be "short") Paul would have been full of transgression BECAUSE Paul violated Pr. 10:19 by speaking for hours (until someone, literally, fell asleep out the window and died!)
Of course, such reasoning is incorrect. Paul can speak for several hours if he wants to...and it's ok for us to imitate such lengthy discourse (1 Cor. 11:1; Php. 4:9).
So, we conclude that Dan's misuse of Pr. 10:19 derives from his failure to properly discern the nature of the Proverbs as recorded in Scripture.
You chimed in, saying: "Yes Paul like any born again believer remained a transgressor all the days of his life on earth .No one can keep the law perfectly without stumbling as if one could be found with a righteousness of their own by keeping it perfectly..."
My response: My point remains.
Now, you point out the phrase "until the time of reformation" (Heb. 9:10), evidently because you think that the time of reformation has already come, right?
And so, you think that because the time of reformation has already come, that there is therefore no longer any need or requirement for proper observance of ceremonial-Levitical-sacrificial Torah, right?
If this is your view, then it appears to hinge upon the phrase "until the time of reformation".
That is, you apparently think that "until the time of reformation" entails "not after the time of reformation".
However, this underlying assumption is grounded upon an unnecessary interpretation of the Greek term for "until" (i.e., "mechri").
Here's some evidence which disconfirms your underlying assumption.
That is, here's some evidence that "A mechri B" does not entail "not A after B".
1. The prophets were "mechri" John (Lk. 17:17). But Jesus affirms the perpetuity of the prophets (Mt. 5:17-20) until ALL things are fulfilled....and all things are NOT fulfilled....therefore the prophets are still in force.
2. Death reigned from Adam "mechri" Moses (Rom. 5:14), but death continues to reign in those who seek to be justified by law without faith (Gal. 3:10, 5:4-5).
3. Jesus was obedient "mechri" death (Php. 2:8), but was Jesus disobedient afterwards? Of course not! Jesus is still obedient.
4. We should keep the commandment "mechri" Jesus appears (1 Ti. 6:14). So should we no longer keep the commandment AFTER Jesus appears? Of course not!
THEREFORE ---> Ceremonial regulation imposed "mechri" a time of reformation (Heb. 9:10) does not require that such regulations cease to function AFTER the time of reformation.
Furthermore, we ALREADY KNOW that those very ceremonial regulations CONTINUED to function AFTER the Messiah's death, burial, and resurrection.
Remember? Paul took part in sacrificial ceremonial vow-making (Ac. 21) for the purpose of proving he walked "orderly in obedience to the law", even in obedience to infant circumcision Torah.
And again, Levitical priests were also believers (Ac. 6:7), again confirming that Levitical priests were Christians who functioned in Levitical Torah, just as Jesus taught.
Again, Levitical Torah will return in the future (Dt. 30:1-8).
Again, it will return (Is. 66).
Again, it will return (Zec. 14).
Again, it will return (Jer. 33).
Again, it will return (Eze. 40-47).
Again, it will return when the Messiah RESTORES the covenant with Levi so that the offering will be pleasing again to YHVH as in the days of old, as in former years (Mal. 3:1-4).
These are reasons which confirm that Levitical Torah is NOT abolished...but will be restored to 100% full function in the future as an expression of our having RETURNED to YHVH in obedience to Torah (Dt. 30:1-8).
We await fulfillment of this prophecy.
blessings...
BibleGuy
Dan misused Pr. 10:19 by apparently implying that my post(s) are too long.
I pointed out that Dan misused Pr. 10:19.
I pointed out that (according to Dan's reasoning which apparently requires that our posts only be "short") Paul would have been full of transgression BECAUSE Paul violated Pr. 10:19 by speaking for hours (until someone, literally, fell asleep out the window and died!)
Of course, such reasoning is incorrect. Paul can speak for several hours if he wants to...and it's ok for us to imitate such lengthy discourse (1 Cor. 11:1; Php. 4:9).
So, we conclude that Dan's misuse of Pr. 10:19 derives from his failure to properly discern the nature of the Proverbs as recorded in Scripture.
You chimed in, saying: "Yes Paul like any born again believer remained a transgressor all the days of his life on earth .No one can keep the law perfectly without stumbling as if one could be found with a righteousness of their own by keeping it perfectly..."
My response: My point remains.
Now, you point out the phrase "until the time of reformation" (Heb. 9:10), evidently because you think that the time of reformation has already come, right?
And so, you think that because the time of reformation has already come, that there is therefore no longer any need or requirement for proper observance of ceremonial-Levitical-sacrificial Torah, right?
If this is your view, then it appears to hinge upon the phrase "until the time of reformation".
That is, you apparently think that "until the time of reformation" entails "not after the time of reformation".
However, this underlying assumption is grounded upon an unnecessary interpretation of the Greek term for "until" (i.e., "mechri").
Here's some evidence which disconfirms your underlying assumption.
That is, here's some evidence that "A mechri B" does not entail "not A after B".
1. The prophets were "mechri" John (Lk. 17:17). But Jesus affirms the perpetuity of the prophets (Mt. 5:17-20) until ALL things are fulfilled....and all things are NOT fulfilled....therefore the prophets are still in force.
2. Death reigned from Adam "mechri" Moses (Rom. 5:14), but death continues to reign in those who seek to be justified by law without faith (Gal. 3:10, 5:4-5).
3. Jesus was obedient "mechri" death (Php. 2:8), but was Jesus disobedient afterwards? Of course not! Jesus is still obedient.
4. We should keep the commandment "mechri" Jesus appears (1 Ti. 6:14). So should we no longer keep the commandment AFTER Jesus appears? Of course not!
THEREFORE ---> Ceremonial regulation imposed "mechri" a time of reformation (Heb. 9:10) does not require that such regulations cease to function AFTER the time of reformation.
Furthermore, we ALREADY KNOW that those very ceremonial regulations CONTINUED to function AFTER the Messiah's death, burial, and resurrection.
Remember? Paul took part in sacrificial ceremonial vow-making (Ac. 21) for the purpose of proving he walked "orderly in obedience to the law", even in obedience to infant circumcision Torah.
And again, Levitical priests were also believers (Ac. 6:7), again confirming that Levitical priests were Christians who functioned in Levitical Torah, just as Jesus taught.
Again, Levitical Torah will return in the future (Dt. 30:1-8).
Again, it will return (Is. 66).
Again, it will return (Zec. 14).
Again, it will return (Jer. 33).
Again, it will return (Eze. 40-47).
Again, it will return when the Messiah RESTORES the covenant with Levi so that the offering will be pleasing again to YHVH as in the days of old, as in former years (Mal. 3:1-4).
These are reasons which confirm that Levitical Torah is NOT abolished...but will be restored to 100% full function in the future as an expression of our having RETURNED to YHVH in obedience to Torah (Dt. 30:1-8).
We await fulfillment of this prophecy.
blessings...
BibleGuy
Hello Nikki84,
Really? Interesting...I suppose that the church does it in a kind of "commemorative" or "memorialized" kind of way?
I suppose that's ok...just as a symbolic reminder of spiritual realities.
But then again, a quick scan of "qatar" and "minchah" in the Torah of Moses confirms that true obedience to these commands pertaining to incense and grain offerings REQUIRES Torah-sanctioned properly functioning Levitical priestly ceremonial sacrificial activity. (wow...that's a mouthful....)
So yes, come to think of it, I now remember participating in a church service once where various "offerings" were spiritualized in a Christ-honoring sort of way....
That's ok! After all, the Torah IS (not "was", but IS) an ongoing shadow pointing to greater realities in our Messiah (Col. 2:17).
Cool...
In fact, it will be even cooler when Levitical Torah is again fully restored and properly fully pointing to the Messiah as it has always been designed to point.
BibleGuy
Really? Interesting...I suppose that the church does it in a kind of "commemorative" or "memorialized" kind of way?
I suppose that's ok...just as a symbolic reminder of spiritual realities.
But then again, a quick scan of "qatar" and "minchah" in the Torah of Moses confirms that true obedience to these commands pertaining to incense and grain offerings REQUIRES Torah-sanctioned properly functioning Levitical priestly ceremonial sacrificial activity. (wow...that's a mouthful....)
So yes, come to think of it, I now remember participating in a church service once where various "offerings" were spiritualized in a Christ-honoring sort of way....
That's ok! After all, the Torah IS (not "was", but IS) an ongoing shadow pointing to greater realities in our Messiah (Col. 2:17).
Cool...
In fact, it will be even cooler when Levitical Torah is again fully restored and properly fully pointing to the Messiah as it has always been designed to point.
BibleGuy
I got in trouble for presuming that dispensationalist's believe these two teachings.
Originally Posted by crossnote
"The core of dispensationalism is twofold.
1. A literal approach to Scripture.
2. A distinction between Israel and the Church.
I hold to both"
So lets discuss number 2, Is this a fundamental belief in dispensationalism, and is it correct?
Use Scripture please.
Originally Posted by crossnote
"The core of dispensationalism is twofold.
1. A literal approach to Scripture.
2. A distinction between Israel and the Church.
I hold to both"
So lets discuss number 2, Is this a fundamental belief in dispensationalism, and is it correct?
Use Scripture please.