-
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.
you haven't heard ANY of those cleverly devised fables from The Holy Spirit.
some other spirit is telling you those things.
Hebrews 5
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. 14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
some other spirit is telling you those things.
Hebrews 5
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. 14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
Christ first, then those who are His at His return, then the rest. Don't want to be part of the last resurrection.
Paul wrote of the resurrection, as a future event. This was after Jesus was resurrected.
I don't know soul sleep. I live and believe in Him, and as He said, I will never die.
What happens to you when you die?
Paul wrote of the resurrection, as a future event. This was after Jesus was resurrected.
I don't know soul sleep. I live and believe in Him, and as He said, I will never die.
What happens to you when you die?
tell me what you know about:
FIRST RESURRECTION:
FIRST DEATH:
SECOND RESURRECTION:
SECOND DEATH:
why wouldn't you want to be part of the Second Resurrection? that's when you'll get your glorified body...that happens at The Second Advent.
tell me who is before Christ at the Second Resurrection (bodily)...who does it say is raised bodily on The Last Day?
where are all the dead (who lived not again until the thousand years was ended) during your future 1,000 years?
what is the church doing during that literal 1,000 years (either in Heaven if that's where you have them, or on earth), if there's no one resurrected to rule and reign over?
FIRST RESURRECTION:
FIRST DEATH:
SECOND RESURRECTION:
SECOND DEATH:
why wouldn't you want to be part of the Second Resurrection? that's when you'll get your glorified body...that happens at The Second Advent.
tell me who is before Christ at the Second Resurrection (bodily)...who does it say is raised bodily on The Last Day?
where are all the dead (who lived not again until the thousand years was ended) during your future 1,000 years?
what is the church doing during that literal 1,000 years (either in Heaven if that's where you have them, or on earth), if there's no one resurrected to rule and reign over?
Last edited:
But do you communicate with the Father? Do you know Him, as you would know a friend? Do you have a relationship with Him, where He speaks to you and you to Him, real dialogue?
No one said anything about being a prophet. The new covenant, of which we know Jesus, says that they all shall know Him, from the greatest to the least.
Not many doctrines allow for this. That is the real deception, and the real killer of souls. For we have live from the Father. And eternal life is knowing the Father.
No one said anything about being a prophet. The new covenant, of which we know Jesus, says that they all shall know Him, from the greatest to the least.
Not many doctrines allow for this. That is the real deception, and the real killer of souls. For we have live from the Father. And eternal life is knowing the Father.
This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priest of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.
The second resurrection is the resurrection of the rest of the dead, those who are not blessed and are not holy, and over whom the second death has power.
1st death for me was when I was crucified with Jesus.
Therefore I have no part in the second death.
As to what the church will be doing, the quoted verse above answers that question. But you will not believe, because it has that symbolic phrase, a thousand years, which John uses 5 times in just a few sentences.
That's alright, you have your mind made up and i suspect that nothing anyone on earth says will convince you. Fine. I am sorry that we cannot agree in Christ.
As to the original question, yes, there will be animal sacrifices during the thousand years. Sad, but some will not believe even is one rose from the dead and told them.
The second resurrection is the resurrection of the rest of the dead, those who are not blessed and are not holy, and over whom the second death has power.
1st death for me was when I was crucified with Jesus.
Therefore I have no part in the second death.
As to what the church will be doing, the quoted verse above answers that question. But you will not believe, because it has that symbolic phrase, a thousand years, which John uses 5 times in just a few sentences.
That's alright, you have your mind made up and i suspect that nothing anyone on earth says will convince you. Fine. I am sorry that we cannot agree in Christ.
As to the original question, yes, there will be animal sacrifices during the thousand years. Sad, but some will not believe even is one rose from the dead and told them.
correction
correction:
somewhere in these multiple (anti) dispensational threads i posted something like "so far only Scotty has come forward, YAY Scotty!"
for the life of me i can't find the post, so don't know the context, but as per anti-dispensationalism in general i need to add: AND ZILLA AND PPS (and anyone else i didn't see or forgot)
not that they have anything to do with me personally, just that they don't hold to dispensationalism, and are not afraid to say so.
z
correction:
somewhere in these multiple (anti) dispensational threads i posted something like "so far only Scotty has come forward, YAY Scotty!"
for the life of me i can't find the post, so don't know the context, but as per anti-dispensationalism in general i need to add: AND ZILLA AND PPS (and anyone else i didn't see or forgot)
not that they have anything to do with me personally, just that they don't hold to dispensationalism, and are not afraid to say so.z
Cerinthus (c. 100 AD)
Cerinthus (c. 100 AD) was a gnostic and to some, an early Christian, who was prominent as a "heresiarch" in the view of the early Church Fathers.[1] Contrary to proto-orthodox Christianity, Cerinthus's school followed the Jewish law, used the Gospel according to the Hebrews, denied that the Supreme God had made the physical world, and denied the divinity of Jesus. In Cerinthus' interpretation, the Christ came to Jesus at baptism, guided him in his ministry, but left him at the crucifixion.
He taught that Jesus would establish a thousand-year reign of sensuous pleasure after the Second Coming but before the General Resurrection, a view that was declared heretical by the Council of Nicaea. Cerinthus used a version of the gospel of Matthew as scripture.
Cerinthus taught at a time when Christianity's relation to Judaism and to Greek philosophy had not yet been clearly defined. In his association with the Jewish law and his modest assessment of Jesus, he was similar to the Ebionites and to other Jewish Christians. In defining the world's creator as the demiurge, he matched Greek dualism philosophy and anticipated the Gnostics.
Early Christian tradition describes Cerinthus as a contemporary to and opponent of John the Evangelist, who wrote the First Epistle of John and the Second Epistle of John to warn the less mature in faith and doctrine about the changes he was making to the original gospel.[2][3] All we know about Cerinthus comes from the writing of his theological opponents.
LINK: Cerinthus - WIKI
Cerinthus (c. 100 AD) was a gnostic and to some, an early Christian, who was prominent as a "heresiarch" in the view of the early Church Fathers.[1] Contrary to proto-orthodox Christianity, Cerinthus's school followed the Jewish law, used the Gospel according to the Hebrews, denied that the Supreme God had made the physical world, and denied the divinity of Jesus. In Cerinthus' interpretation, the Christ came to Jesus at baptism, guided him in his ministry, but left him at the crucifixion.
He taught that Jesus would establish a thousand-year reign of sensuous pleasure after the Second Coming but before the General Resurrection, a view that was declared heretical by the Council of Nicaea. Cerinthus used a version of the gospel of Matthew as scripture.
Cerinthus taught at a time when Christianity's relation to Judaism and to Greek philosophy had not yet been clearly defined. In his association with the Jewish law and his modest assessment of Jesus, he was similar to the Ebionites and to other Jewish Christians. In defining the world's creator as the demiurge, he matched Greek dualism philosophy and anticipated the Gnostics.
Early Christian tradition describes Cerinthus as a contemporary to and opponent of John the Evangelist, who wrote the First Epistle of John and the Second Epistle of John to warn the less mature in faith and doctrine about the changes he was making to the original gospel.[2][3] All we know about Cerinthus comes from the writing of his theological opponents.
LINK: Cerinthus - WIKI
huh? you died....but did you COME TO LIFE? or are you in "soul sleep" mode til the general resurrection?
so, if you have undergone the FIRST DEATH, have you not also undergone the FIRST RESURRECTION? - or rather will you undergo the first resurrection when you die (though according to you your body WON'T DIE, since you've already undergone the first death....the only other death is the second death, the lake of fire).
are both deaths spiritual?
the only way the second death has no power over you is if you have undergone THE FIRST RESURRECTION - it does NOT say:
This is the first death. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first death; over these the second death has no power.
it says:
This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power
so, if the first resurrection is the new birth (saved christian) plus FIRST DEATH (the body) resulting in reigning with Christ a thousand years (a symbolically expressed term for the messianic portion of the Kingdom) NOW, in Heaven, with his Apostles and all saints:
then that means the period termed symolically a thousand years is happening NOW.
if that isn't true, your FIRST DEATH means nothing (its wrong anyways, since your body has to die ONCE and THEN the Judgment........unless you are among those Paul talked about at the Second Advent: THEN WE WHO ARE ALIVE AND REMAIN SHALL BE CAUGHT UP...in which case they shall be CHANGED and will not taste death as ALL do before The Second Advent)
so? he repeats it ALL IN THAT SINGLE PASSAGE.
that phrase is used nowhere else. NOWHERE. and the entrie passage uses symbolic language, as does most of Revelation.
that SINGLE phrase has you building a whole dispensational model around it. even though you have the audacity to deny you do it.
i don't know your jesus.
so, if you have undergone the FIRST DEATH, have you not also undergone the FIRST RESURRECTION? - or rather will you undergo the first resurrection when you die (though according to you your body WON'T DIE, since you've already undergone the first death....the only other death is the second death, the lake of fire).
are both deaths spiritual?
the only way the second death has no power over you is if you have undergone THE FIRST RESURRECTION - it does NOT say:
This is the first death. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first death; over these the second death has no power.
it says:
This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power
so, if the first resurrection is the new birth (saved christian) plus FIRST DEATH (the body) resulting in reigning with Christ a thousand years (a symbolically expressed term for the messianic portion of the Kingdom) NOW, in Heaven, with his Apostles and all saints:
then that means the period termed symolically a thousand years is happening NOW.
if that isn't true, your FIRST DEATH means nothing (its wrong anyways, since your body has to die ONCE and THEN the Judgment........unless you are among those Paul talked about at the Second Advent: THEN WE WHO ARE ALIVE AND REMAIN SHALL BE CAUGHT UP...in which case they shall be CHANGED and will not taste death as ALL do before The Second Advent)
so? he repeats it ALL IN THAT SINGLE PASSAGE.
that phrase is used nowhere else. NOWHERE. and the entrie passage uses symbolic language, as does most of Revelation.
that SINGLE phrase has you building a whole dispensational model around it. even though you have the audacity to deny you do it.
i don't know your jesus.
Last edited:
Various Dispensational Positions
Because dispensationalism is relatively new compared with covenantalism, it is still a developing doctrine. Within the contemporary dispensational camp, there are two views: the classic and the progressive. The core doctrine of classic dispensationalism, as propagated by John Nelson Darby, C. I. Scofield, and Lewis Sperry Chafer, is God’s two distinct redemptive plans in past, present, and future – history one for Israel and one for the church. This classic dispensationalism was modified into “revised dispensationalism” starting in the 1960s. It is essentially the same as classic dispensationalism except for its revision of the Scofield Reference Bible, and thus will not be addressed here. Its main proponents are Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord, and J. Dwight Pentecost. Revised dispensationalism, in turn, developed more recently into “progressive dispensationalism.”
Progressive dispensationalists such as Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L. Bock, and Robert L. Saucy, on the other hand, have moved closer to covenantalism and teach that God has a single redemptive plan for his people composed of Jews and Gentiles “from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages” (Rev. 7:9). However, they still adhere to dispensational premillennialism in which Christ will come again and set up an earthly millennial kingdom for all nations, but “fulfill[ing] for [Israel] the promises covenanted to her, and He will rule over all nations so that through Him all nations might be blessed.”4 This view is in contrast with historic premillennialism, the premillennial view before classic dispensationalism started in the early nineteenth century.
Although historic premillennialists believe in a future millennial kingdom of Christ, they do not teach a divided people of God during any period of redemptive history. Most dispensationalist lay people will be surprised that their seminaries today do not teach the classic view that their pastors and teachers taught them in the past, but the progressive view that is presently evolving among dispensationalist theologians.5 Thus, our focus in this article will be on how to address classic dispensationalist pastors and lay people, rather than theologians. Unless progressive dispensationalism is the subject in view, we will thus use the word dispensationalism in this article to refer to classic dispensationalism.
Because dispensationalism is relatively new compared with covenantalism, it is still a developing doctrine. Within the contemporary dispensational camp, there are two views: the classic and the progressive. The core doctrine of classic dispensationalism, as propagated by John Nelson Darby, C. I. Scofield, and Lewis Sperry Chafer, is God’s two distinct redemptive plans in past, present, and future – history one for Israel and one for the church. This classic dispensationalism was modified into “revised dispensationalism” starting in the 1960s. It is essentially the same as classic dispensationalism except for its revision of the Scofield Reference Bible, and thus will not be addressed here. Its main proponents are Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord, and J. Dwight Pentecost. Revised dispensationalism, in turn, developed more recently into “progressive dispensationalism.”
Progressive dispensationalists such as Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L. Bock, and Robert L. Saucy, on the other hand, have moved closer to covenantalism and teach that God has a single redemptive plan for his people composed of Jews and Gentiles “from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages” (Rev. 7:9). However, they still adhere to dispensational premillennialism in which Christ will come again and set up an earthly millennial kingdom for all nations, but “fulfill[ing] for [Israel] the promises covenanted to her, and He will rule over all nations so that through Him all nations might be blessed.”4 This view is in contrast with historic premillennialism, the premillennial view before classic dispensationalism started in the early nineteenth century.
Although historic premillennialists believe in a future millennial kingdom of Christ, they do not teach a divided people of God during any period of redemptive history. Most dispensationalist lay people will be surprised that their seminaries today do not teach the classic view that their pastors and teachers taught them in the past, but the progressive view that is presently evolving among dispensationalist theologians.5 Thus, our focus in this article will be on how to address classic dispensationalist pastors and lay people, rather than theologians. Unless progressive dispensationalism is the subject in view, we will thus use the word dispensationalism in this article to refer to classic dispensationalism.
Why is Dispensationalism Pervasive?
Since we are dealing with how covenantalists are to persuade dispensationalists successfully, we will first briefly examine the history of dispensationalism so we can place its popularity in proper perspective. Then we will explore some of the reasons why this view is by far more popular and pervasive than covenantalism. After we determine what these reasons are, we can then offer some reasons why teaching covenant theology may offer the best appeal to dispensationalists.
Dispensationalism arose within the Plymouth Brethren movement in Great Britain in the early nineteenth century. John Nelson Darby, an Anglican priest, became the leading proponent of this system after his disaffection with the externalism, liberalism, and worldliness in the church. His teachings spread throughout Europe and made their way to America through his visits in the 1860s. Dr. James H. Brookes, a Presbyterian pastor from St. Louis, became one of his leading students. Under Brookes’ discipleship, C. I. Scofield, a lawyer from Kansas, published the ubiquitous Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. This Bible edition became one of the most influential books in the history of American evangelicalism....
etc etc
do you believe this yet VW?
do you care?
Since we are dealing with how covenantalists are to persuade dispensationalists successfully, we will first briefly examine the history of dispensationalism so we can place its popularity in proper perspective. Then we will explore some of the reasons why this view is by far more popular and pervasive than covenantalism. After we determine what these reasons are, we can then offer some reasons why teaching covenant theology may offer the best appeal to dispensationalists.
Dispensationalism arose within the Plymouth Brethren movement in Great Britain in the early nineteenth century. John Nelson Darby, an Anglican priest, became the leading proponent of this system after his disaffection with the externalism, liberalism, and worldliness in the church. His teachings spread throughout Europe and made their way to America through his visits in the 1860s. Dr. James H. Brookes, a Presbyterian pastor from St. Louis, became one of his leading students. Under Brookes’ discipleship, C. I. Scofield, a lawyer from Kansas, published the ubiquitous Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. This Bible edition became one of the most influential books in the history of American evangelicalism....
etc etc
do you believe this yet VW?
do you care?
I wonder just how many times it is written that we have died with Christ? 2, or maybe 3, maybe even 10 times?
I guess that this is symbolic also. Hasn't happened yet, and we are waiting to die in our flesh.
If we have not died with Him to be raised with Him, then we are still in our sins. In that case, the only resurrection we will have a part in is the second, and then we will find that we are not in His book of life, which is Jesus. Oh, but wait, that is symbolic also. There are not any books in heaven, not those of all the deeds of every person, and certainly not a book of life. I think maybe we ought to realize that the lake of fire is symbolic also. So in that case, everyone is saved, since there is no lake of fire, no eternal death.
As I said, sad.
I guess that this is symbolic also. Hasn't happened yet, and we are waiting to die in our flesh.
If we have not died with Him to be raised with Him, then we are still in our sins. In that case, the only resurrection we will have a part in is the second, and then we will find that we are not in His book of life, which is Jesus. Oh, but wait, that is symbolic also. There are not any books in heaven, not those of all the deeds of every person, and certainly not a book of life. I think maybe we ought to realize that the lake of fire is symbolic also. So in that case, everyone is saved, since there is no lake of fire, no eternal death.
As I said, sad.
Those are all just names for doctrines which men have come up with to stay away from Jesus and death on His cross. It is all foolishness to me, and to God.
I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ who died for my sins,, actually died for me, and I died with Him to this sinful life to be raised up with Him and in Him to a life that is to and for and in God. Period. I have these things from and by and in the Holy Spirit.
You are way out there sister.
I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ who died for my sins,, actually died for me, and I died with Him to this sinful life to be raised up with Him and in Him to a life that is to and for and in God. Period. I have these things from and by and in the Holy Spirit.
You are way out there sister.
The “plain, literal” meaning of Scripture is the dispensationalists’ response to figurative and typological interpretation, which they equate to liberalism. Doesn’t Rev. 20:1-6 plainly state that there will be a millennial reign of Christ? Doesn’t Rev. 14:1-8 plainly list the tribes of Israel who make up the 144,000 millennial evangelists? But this kind of interpretation may also be an indication of a lack of diligence in trying to understand Scripture. Weber observes this phenomenon in American evangelicalism,
Moreover, dispensationalist churches and schools are unwilling to teach differing eschatological views.
Many evangelicals are amazed to learn that amillennial and postmillennial views exist, never having heard of them from their churches, bookstores, or their favorite radio programs. Vern S. Poythress writes about his dialogues with dispensationalists: “Too frequently nondispensationalists meet lay dispensationalists who are shocked to discover that anyone would hold views different from theirs. Their first reaction may be to wonder whether the nondispensationalist is a genuine Christian.”12
In his recent study of prophecy belief in modern American culture, historian Paul Boyer found that in addition to the relatively small number of committed “experts” who study Bible prophecy and seem to have everything figured out, there are millions of others who are not so well informed but still believe the Bible contains valuable clues about the future. Such people are susceptible to popularizers who “confidently weave Bible passages into highly imaginative end-time scenarios, or who promulgate particular schemes of prophetic interpretation.”10
Grammatical-historical, typological, and redemptive-historical analyses and understanding of unclear passages require a more comprehensive and lengthy analysis, which modern evangelicals are not inclined to do. Instead, because of the reluctance to do diligent study, dispensationalists often lay the charge against those who differ that their view is liberal, new, or worse, unscriptural.11
Moreover, dispensationalist churches and schools are unwilling to teach differing eschatological views.
Many evangelicals are amazed to learn that amillennial and postmillennial views exist, never having heard of them from their churches, bookstores, or their favorite radio programs. Vern S. Poythress writes about his dialogues with dispensationalists: “Too frequently nondispensationalists meet lay dispensationalists who are shocked to discover that anyone would hold views different from theirs. Their first reaction may be to wonder whether the nondispensationalist is a genuine Christian.”12
and, you just happened to open the Scriptures and find a literal 1,000 years with animal sacrifices.
(with the other irreconcilable corruptions of redemptive History and Christ's Coming(s), His Finished Work, God's promises fulfilled in Him.....)
foolishness? you know nothing but Christ and him crucified?
NOT SO. but at this moment its a convenient place to go.
you are CERTAIN there will be a future millennium with all that stuff going on, even though that system of belief ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES that Jesus Christ DID NOT fulfill all righteousness. it has BUILT IN unfinished work by Christ....do you REALLY know The Jesus as revealed in the Bible?
yes, i am waaaaaaaaay out there....and getting spiritually as far away from that mess as i can.
too bad you've decided personal revelation trumps study VW.
p.s.: YOU DIED...but are you alive now?
(with the other irreconcilable corruptions of redemptive History and Christ's Coming(s), His Finished Work, God's promises fulfilled in Him.....)
foolishness? you know nothing but Christ and him crucified?
NOT SO. but at this moment its a convenient place to go.
you are CERTAIN there will be a future millennium with all that stuff going on, even though that system of belief ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES that Jesus Christ DID NOT fulfill all righteousness. it has BUILT IN unfinished work by Christ....do you REALLY know The Jesus as revealed in the Bible?
yes, i am waaaaaaaaay out there....and getting spiritually as far away from that mess as i can.
too bad you've decided personal revelation trumps study VW.
p.s.: YOU DIED...but are you alive now?
Last edited:
Another approach which covenantalists use in this debate is to appeal to the unorthodoxy and newness of dispensationalism, pointing out that this system started less than two centuries out of two thousand years of Christian history, and was never conceived of until Darby’s time about 1830.
Realizing the historical indefensibility of their position, dispensationalists usually teach that some early church fathers held a premillennial view, but they fail to distinguish between the dispensational and historical kinds. However, in the present evangelical scene, innovation and newness, e.g., contemporary elements of worship, are perceived as measures of success, relevancy, and knowledge. What was true in a particular earlier period and culture may not be true in the contemporary scene; the present generation is by far more sophisticated and intelligent than the past generations. Thus, in the sight of today’s evangelicals, the secret Rapture, the rebuilding of the temple, and the identity of the Antichrist are new ideas that were discovered through superior and more refined hermeneutics.
Realizing the historical indefensibility of their position, dispensationalists usually teach that some early church fathers held a premillennial view, but they fail to distinguish between the dispensational and historical kinds. However, in the present evangelical scene, innovation and newness, e.g., contemporary elements of worship, are perceived as measures of success, relevancy, and knowledge. What was true in a particular earlier period and culture may not be true in the contemporary scene; the present generation is by far more sophisticated and intelligent than the past generations. Thus, in the sight of today’s evangelicals, the secret Rapture, the rebuilding of the temple, and the identity of the Antichrist are new ideas that were discovered through superior and more refined hermeneutics.