[JoeyArnold]

Originally Posted by chrysostom

so in a way you have proven my point
by saying 'reign of Christ' which is not even there
you have completely ignored history for a possible answer

What I said was besides the point because I may have typos or bad grammar or my facts not strait or my head not screwed on right. Look past what I was saying in the questions or comments anywhere and concentrate more on what I was trying to say or ask and then concentrate especially on the answers that are out there. As the X-Files (show) do say, the truth is out there.

Truth = out there = X-Files? Yes.

I was asking what people thought about the future. I suggested some possible future events. I was not trying to state which events that I believe in. The different views on the reign of Christ, whether it happened, is happening, or is going to happen, is part of the point and reason behind this thread.



Purpose behind this thread? To ponder.

It was to ask the questions about what is going to happen or about what is happening or in what already happened in order to see what and how and why people believe whatever they believe so we can all become better people from such quest to better serve each other and God more through it therefore.

Millennium (Falcon) Reign of Christ = future event? Yes.

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Originally Posted by godrulz

I am not sure I have the time or energy to do justice to a topic with someone such as yourself. Your Enyart debate involved much work and was likely read by few. Me bad, I have read dozens of books these last few years, yet 'The Plot' still sits half finished. I must have ADD/ADHD. You would squash me like a bug, even though my view is superior (bah hah).

If you rejected the Deity and resurrection of Christ, I would consider that a noble undertaking. Calvinism vs Open Theism would be my pet, fun hobby horse, but look at the volumes written about this that we have both read. To regurgitate this or reinvent the Enyart/AMR debate would seem redundant.

Are we not set in our ways? Are we not convinced we each have a more biblical view? I appreciate your mastery of Calvinism, but doubt we would get far in light of centuries of debate.

If we talked about original sin, for e.g., I would just give you Overstreet's link, much to your chagrin.

If we talked about OSAS, I would just give you an Amazon link.

I fear this would get me killed or your blood pressure raised.

What I would like to see is using our combined intellect to reach those who reject the essentials of the faith (atheists, Muslims, Mormons, etc.).

Well, I just wanted to make sure I was not missing an opportunity.

Thanks for clarifying.

AMR

[JoeyArnold]

Originally Posted by godrulz

Dispensationalists make a case for dispensationalism vs covenantalism (how much discontinuity vs continuity in redemptive history) from all the relevant verses in Scripture. It does involve a hermeneutical paradigm in addition to proof texts. It is argumentum ad hominem to dismiss a view just because someone held it who was imperfect. Many godly believers see it in Scripture (but there are a variety of views within the broad ones). Scripture predates those who formalized/popularized a view (you could argue like JWs against the Trinity using your logic, but you would be wrong like them).

Doctrine is based on all of Scripture, including Paul and the rest of the NT. Neither Jesus nor the disciples taught everything possible in the Gospels (progressive revelation).

Islam is a huge threat to the souls of men and world peace. Disp views can cause some division in the Church, but they do not send people to hell nor do they disturb the peace of the planet. Islam kills people and sends them to hell. Disp views get people searching Scripture with no physical or eternal harm (disps fully affirm core gospel truth and essentials of the faith).

This post sets your credibility back to the stone age.

Thanks. I agree that researching dispensation theology is good.

I also believe that dispensations and covenants work together instead of against each other somehow someway. After learning about dispensationism, I chose to believe in them.

Dispensations = compatible with covenants? Yes.

[JoeyArnold]

Originally Posted by HisServant

How would you have me substantiate something that didn't exist?

We know that the only term 'dispensation' was used in the scriptures was to contrast the old and new covenants.. and that is it.

As far as any other dispensational teachings... there are none. Some dispensationalist will try and point at one church father who was 'premillenial'.. but that is all he was.

Other then that, no one held to any type of dispensations until Darby dreamed them up... 1700 years later.

Do you believe in only two dispensations then? The Old Testament dispensation and the New Testament dispensation. Will there ever be a third dispensation in the future then?

Only two dispensations = Old and New Testament? No.

[JoeyArnold]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

Joey-
Which dispensation do you currently believe we are in?

Which dispensation are we in right now? Church age.

[Wings]

Originally Posted by HisServant

Yet you follow his teachings... curious.

'For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword,
piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow,
and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.'
(Heb 4:12)

HisServant

Hi there,

You assume a great deal, considering you do not know me.

I have never read anything written by Schofield, so how can I be said to 'follow his teaching'.

All I have read from you in this thread is accusation and presumption born of a lack of true knowledge on the subject.

I make no claim other than that the Lord Jesus Christ is my Saviour, Lord and Head.
All other issues must be measured by the Word of God.

May God' s perfect will be done in both you and I for His Name and glory's sake.

In Christ Jesus
Our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head

Wings

[chrysostom]

Originally Posted by JoeyArnold

What I said was besides the point because I may have typos or bad grammar or my facts not strait or my head not screwed on right. Look past what I was saying in the questions or comments anywhere and concentrate more on what I was trying to say or ask and then concentrate especially on the answers that are out there. As the X-Files (show) do say, the truth is out there.

Truth = out there = X-Files? Yes.

I was asking what people thought about the future. I suggested some possible future events. I was not trying to state which events that I believe in. The different views on the reign of Christ, whether it happened, is happening, or is going to happen, is part of the point and reason behind this thread.



Purpose behind this thread? To ponder.

It was to ask the questions about what is going to happen or about what is happening or in what already happened in order to see what and how and why people believe whatever they believe so we can all become better people from such quest to better serve each other and God more through it therefore.

Millennium (Falcon) Reign of Christ = future event? Yes.

but you said

"thousand year millennium reign of Jesus"

which is not only incorrect

it is extremely misleading

[HisServant]

Originally Posted by Wings

I make no claim other than that the Lord Jesus Christ is my Saviour, Lord and Head.

Which is a claim that I find to be irrevalent according to scripture and quite anti-christian in the way you conveyed it.

[Squeaky]

ROFLOL These boards are so full of people that have arguments against something they cant even define. The devil is having a hay day with you people. And you are submitting whole heartedly.

2 Cor 10:4-5
4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds,
5 casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,
(NKJ)

Rev 22:18-19
18 For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book;
19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
(NKJ)

[Lighthouse]

Originally Posted by JoeyArnold

Which dispensation are we in right now? Church age.

That doesn't answer my question. I believe we are in the "dispensation of the grace of God," as Paul put it. It has been given other names since: Mid Acts, Acts 9, Pauline, etc.

[godrulz]

Originally Posted by JoeyArnold

Thanks. I agree that researching dispensation theology is good.

I also believe that dispensations and covenants work together instead of against each other somehow someway. After learning about dispensationism, I chose to believe in them.

Dispensations = compatible with covenants? Yes.

Dispensationalism certainly teaches the covenants found in Scripture, but this is not the same as Reformed Covenantalism that sees unity in redemptive history vs discontinuity of dispensationalism.

Both views affirm Abrahamic, Davidic, etc. covenants, but Covenantalists are not usually pre-trib, pre-mill, don't strongly distinguish Israel/Church, etc.

[godrulz]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

That doesn't answer my question. I believe we are in the "dispensation of the grace of God," as Paul put it. It has been given other names since: Mid Acts, Acts 9, Pauline, etc.

The Church Age is the Age of Grace. The Church began at Pentecost in Acts 2 (almost everyone agrees on this except MAD).

[Damian]

Originally Posted by JoeyArnold

Do you believe in dispensations? Yes. I currently believe in seven. I learned about them at Word of Life Bible Institute: http://www.wol.org/biblei/

No. I truly believe that God is not the author of confusion. And that is exactly what "covenantalism" and "dispensationalism" are...confusion. I am very grateful that I don't have to deal with that mess. Clarity of thought comes only when you are willing to dispense with stupidity. And that is the only form of dispensationalism that I am committed to...dispensing with stupidity.

[chrysostom]

Originally Posted by Damian

I truly believe that God is not the author of confusion. .

so how do you explain the tower of Babel?

could it be that He wanted to see how we would treat those we couldn't understand?

[JoeyArnold]

Originally Posted by chrysostom

but you said

"thousand year millennium reign of Jesus"

which is not only incorrect

it is extremely misleading

I did not tell anybody to believe what I was saying.

I was asking a question.

I was asking, "Do you believe in that thousand year reign?"

What I called it was besides the point. You knew what I was saying.

You knew what I was trying to say.

Your answers is what I was looking for.

Your answers is what you gave me.

But I was not giving an answer myself.

I was asking a question.

I was asking, "Is it called this or that or what?"

How could I mislead if I was not leading?