The dispensational key?

[Carbon]

I have read that dispensationalists believe they have the key in the seventy-weeks prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27, to all the new testament prophecys. However, if you take this waway from them, ther whole system colapses.

Their interpretation of Daniel 9, proves they interpret the new testament in light of the old testament. Which is completly backwards.

Dispensationalists confuse Christ with the antichrist. In Daniel 9:27, the he that confirms a covenent with many they claim to be the antichrist. However, the he is Christ.

Thoughts?

 

[Red Baker]

I have read that dispensationalists believe they have the key in the seventy-weeks prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27, to all the new testament prophecys. However, if you take this waway from them, ther whole system colapses.

Their interpretation of Daniel 9, proves they interpret the new testament ion light of the old testament. Which is completly backwards.

Dispensationalists confuse Christ with the antichrist. In Daniel 9:27, the he that confirms a covenent with many they claim to be the antichrist. However, the he is Christ.

Thoughts?

I have some ~ I may have time to make a couple of posts before I leave to head toward Atlanta for a couple of days, I'll see.

 

[Mr GLee]

I have read that dispensationalists believe they have the key in the seventy-weeks prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27, to all the new testament prophecys. However, if you take this waway from them, ther whole system colapses.

Their interpretation of Daniel 9, proves they interpret the new testament ion light of the old testament. Which is completly backwards.

Dispensationalists confuse Christ with the antichrist. In Daniel 9:27, the he that confirms a covenent with many they claim to be the antichrist. However, the he is Christ.

Thoughts?

I would offer.

The old and new testament or covenant work all together as one word. .( prophesy)

Can't have one (old)without the other (new) . Like love and marriage. Two is the witness one God has spoke.

The law and the prophets. The law and its testimony the prophets. (sola scriptura)

Signified by Moses law giver and and Elijah the prophet . The power of God that power was passed on to John the opening of the new testament, the testimonial of the law the old. LOL The baby with the baby carriage.

Luke 1:16-18King James Version16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years.

The law and prophets (sola scriptura) The wisdom from above. as it is written It apposes seeking wisdom of this world "earthly inspired".

The living seeking (necromancy) the dead relatives called today patron saints previously a "law of the legion of fathers" oral traditons of dying mankind Pharisees with Sadducees

Moses (law) and Elias (testimony) used in a parables to represent (sola scriptura)

Below Peter was confused and did not understanding the parable. . thought he put God in a box. , no faith as it is written the unseen eternal things that could please the father. .

Matthew 17:3-5King James VersionAnd, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him (sola scriptura)

Another parable that teaches no man can serves two good teaching masters as one Lord using mammon to represent the wisdom of this dying world and sola scripture the law and prophets . . Moses and Elias

Luke 16:161 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

Luke 15: 13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and One word .Let there be the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God (living word) and mammon. (Lust flesh, lust of the eye )

Luke 15:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. . . . . (sola scriptura)

Luke 15: 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Seek Hebrew Darash . Seek after those who seek the dead relative for the dead. . or seek after the living God for those dead in there trespass and sin without a living hope and God in this present world.

Sola scriptura one word that testified to the law . . ."Let there be" and it good testimony Christ alone good .

The law of faith God declaring that which will come to pass. His powerful faith as a labor of love enabling "it was golden good"

Isiah 8: 19;20 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

One just Word . . .Let there be" . . . And the justifier

Two laws working as one perfect law

Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

 

[fastfredy0]

I have read that dispensationalists believe they have the key in the seventy-weeks prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27, to all the new testament prophecys. However, if you take this waway from them, ther whole system colapses.

Their interpretation of Daniel 9, proves they interpret the new testament ion light of the old testament. Which is completly backwards.

Dispensationalists confuse Christ with the antichrist. In Daniel 9:27, the he that confirms a covenent with many they claim to be the antichrist. However, the he is Christ.

Thoughts?

You can't discard an entire system because you find one supposed flaw. I am not familiar with the flaw you pointed out and when it comes to eschatology I gave up long ago.
One of dispensationalists main hermeneutic is to have a literal interpretation which limits interpretation of scripture, whereas non-literal hermeneutics leads to many, many interpretations. This not being a proof that the dispensationalists are correct. I think they claim there were 400 prophecies in the Old Testament and all but 7ish were fulfilled literally.

That being said, I don't have the background to defend them. Not that God takes suggestions, but I wished He wrote/said everything in a literal fashion.

​

Covenant Theology vs Dispensationalism
Which system is correct (probably better stated as which system is less incorrect) is a mystery to me.

 

[Red Baker]

You can't discard an entire system because you find one supposed flaw. I am not familiar with the flaw you pointed out and when it comes to eschatology I gave up long ago. One of dispensationalists main hermeneutic is to have a literal interpretation which limits interpretation of scripture, whereas non-literal hermeneutics leads to many, many interpretations. This not being a proof that the dispensationalists are correct. I think they claim there were 400 prophecies in the Old Testament and all but 7ish were fulfilled literally.

Greetings.

Actually, any of the four school of teachings, if one of them has the truth, and one does, then the scriptures themselves would defend them, no fear. All men must constantly as long as they live compare their understanding with scriptures, and seek for a perfect flow from one prophet/apostle to another. having them all teaching the same truth, if any place of our understanding can be broken, then we must labor to seek reconciliation with the scriptures, for truth is one cohesive whole from Genesis to Revelation, etc.

but I wished He wrote/said everything in a literal fashion.

But, God did not do so, neither did Christ always spoke literally.

Matthew 13:13​

“Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.”

John 16:25​

“These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.”

John 16:29​

“His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb.”

Why did God inspire dark sayings that are hard to understand? Because success, truth, and wisdom are not rights, regardless what the majority of men think, and what Kamala Harris said otherwise! They are privileges by God’s grace for those humble enough to study them diligently (Proverb 1:7; 2:1-9). Wisdom mocks those who are not fervently earnest (Proverb 1:24-33; 8:36). But wisdom offers herself freely to the passionate (Proverb 8:17). Selah.

Jesus often spoke in parables, which are merely lengthy proverbs. Why? To confuse the majority of his hearers, who did not deserve the truth (Matt 13:10-17). If we neglect His opportunities to learn truth and gain wisdom, the glorious God of heaven has promised to take from us even the little understanding we think we have (Luke 8:18; Isaiah 66:4).

 

[Mr GLee]

Greetings.

Actually, any of the four school of teachings, if one of them has the truth, and one does, then the scriptures themselves would defend them, no fear. All men must constantly as long as they live compare their understanding with scriptures, and seek for a perfect flow from one prophet/apostle to another. having them all teaching the same truth, if any place of our understanding can be broken, then we must labor to seek reconciliation with the scriptures, for truth is one cohesive whole from Genesis to Revelation, etc.

But, God did not do so, neither did Christ always spoke literally.

Matthew 13:13​

“Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.”

John 16:25​

“These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.”

John 16:29​

“His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb.”

Why did God inspire dark sayings that are hard to understand? Because success, truth, and wisdom are not rights, regardless what the majority of men think, and what Kamala Harris said otherwise! They are privileges by God’s grace for those humble enough to study them diligently (Proverb 1:7; 2:1-9). Wisdom mocks those who are not fervently earnest (Proverb 1:24-33; 8:36). But wisdom offers herself freely to the passionate (Proverb 8:17). Selah.

Jesus often spoke in parables, which are merely lengthy proverbs. Why? To confuse the majority of his hearers, who did not deserve the truth (Matt 13:10-17). If we neglect His opportunities to learn truth and gain wisdom, the glorious God of heaven has promised to take from us even the little understanding we think we have (Luke 8:18; Isaiah 66:4).

Amen parables teach us how to walk by faith the unseen eternal things of Christ

It is especially needed today to rightly divide the parable according to the prescription in 2 Corinthian 4:18 comparing the temporal historical seen to the unseen eternal spiritual giving the gospel rest

Sign to wonder after have in effect replace the spirit understanding .

Satan the king of lying signs to wonder, wonder, wonder after as if prophecy . No signs were given to wonder after we have prohecy sola scriptura till the end of time

 

[Carbon]

I would offer.

The old and new testament or covenant work all together as one word. .( prophesy)

The OT is types of shadows and the NT is the fulfillment. God only has one plan.

Can't have one (old)without the other (new) . Like love and marriage.

I believe you would carry this too far.

 

[Carbon]

You can't discard an entire system because you find one supposed flaw. I am not familiar with the flaw you pointed out and when it comes to eschatology I gave up long ago.

You may find it interesting to look into...... Or, maybe not.

One of dispensationalists main hermeneutic is to have a literal interpretation which limits interpretation of scripture,

Literal when it works in their favor.

 

[fastfredy0]

Literal when it works in their favor.

Too general a statement to comment upon.

My point is the dispensationalism uses a literal interpretation much more than covenant theology. I am not saying which system is right or wrong more often. I am saying the a non-literal translation can be abused more than a literal translation.
Now, if 80-100% of the bible should not be understood for what it literally says, then the more non-literal Covenant hermeneutic would seem to have an edge.
A non-literal translation can be abused more than a literal one. Again, this is not proof of the Dispensational or Covenant system being superior.
I'm not taking a side. I'm just pointing out there is another side.

DISPENSATIONALISM	COVENANT THEOLOGY
1. Originally Calvinist; now it may be Arminian or modified Calvinist. Almost never 5-point Calvinist.	1. Always Calvinist. Usually 5-point.
2. Stresses “literal” interpretation of the Bible. Note: ALL prophecy that has been fulfilled has done so in a natural, literal and grammatical sense without exception. There are over 400 prophecies of which, perhaps, seven could arguably be fulfilled allegorically.	2. Accepts both literal and figurative interpretation of the Bible. Note: ALL prophecy that has been fulfilled has done so in a natural, literal and grammatical sense without exception.
3. Usually does not accept the idea of the “Analogy of Faith.” (the interpretation of each passage in conformity with the whole tenor of revealed truth)	3. Almost always accepts the idea of The “Analogy of Faith.” (the interpretation of each passage in conformity with the whole tenor of revealed truth)
4. “Israel” always means only the literal, physical descendants of Jacob. (see Israel and the Church Compared)	4. “Israel” may mean either literal, physical descendants of Jacob or the figurative, spiritual Israel, depending on context.
5. “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16 means physical Israel alone.	5. “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16 means the spiritual Israel, parallel to Galatians 3:29; Romans 2:28-29, Romans 9:6; Philippians 3:3.
6. God has 2 peoples with 2 separate destinies: Israel (earthly) and the Church (heavenly).	6. God has always had only 1 people, the Church gradually developed. (see note at bottom) The dispensationalist argues: Why the direct and unconditional demand of a new birth upon one with the Judaist character that Nicodemus represented? Why the emphasized account of the salvation of Saul of Tarsus who had lived in all good conscience before the law (Judaism) Why the salvation of the apostles and 3,000 Jews on the Day of Pentecost and many obedient priests. Would not one of these be saved through Judaism?
7. The Church was born at Pentecost at the coming of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2	7. The Church began in O. T. (Acts 7:38) and reached fulfillment in the N. T. (This contradicts Matthew 16:18 in which Jesus say “I will (future tense) build my church”
8 The Church was not prophesied as such in the O.T. but was a hidden mystery until the N.T.	8. There are many O. T. prophecies of the N. T. Church.
9. All O.T. prophecies for 'Israel' are for literal Israel, not the Church.'	9. Some O. T. prophecies are for literal Israel, others are for spiritual Israel.
10. God's main purpose in history is literal Israel.	10. God’s main purpose in history is Christ and secondarily the Church.
11. The Church is a parenthesis in God's program for the ages and was initiated and will end in the current dispensation.	11. The Church is the culmination of God’s saving purpose for the ages.
12. The main heir to Abraham's covenant was Isaac and literal Israel. (Christians are Abrahams spiritual seed (Galatians 3:29) because when one believes, he is baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ, who is the seed of Abraham.	12. The main heir to Abraham’s covenant and was Christ and spiritual Israel.
13. There was no eternal Covenant of Redemption within the Trinity.	13. The eternal Covenant of Redemption was within the Trinity to effect election.
14. There was no Covenant of Works with Adam in the Garden of Eden.	14. God made a conditional Covenant of Works with Adam as representative for all his posterity.

 

[fastfredy0]

15. There was no Covenant of Grace concerning Adam.	15. God made a Covenant of Grace with Christ and His people, including Adam. Not found in scripture.
16. Israel was rash to accept the Covenant at Mt. Sinai.	16. Israel was right to accept the Covenant Mt. Sinai.
17. The “New Covenant” of Jeremiah 31:31- 34 is only for literal Israel and is not the New Covenant of Luke 22:20. Characteristics of this covenant have been applied by God on believers.	17. The “New Covenant” of Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the same as in Luke 22:20; both are for spiritual Israel according to Hebrews 8.
18. God's program in history is mainly through separate dispensations.	18. God’s program in history is mainly through related covenants.
19. Some dispensationalists have said that O. T. sinners were saved by works. "There are two widely different, standardized, divine provisions, whereby man, who is utterly fallen may come into the favor of God ... To such a degree as the soteriology of Judaism and the soteriology of Christianity differ, to the same degree do their eschatology’s differ.	19. No man has ever been saved by works, but only by grace. Salvation is through Christ alone.
20. Most Dispensationalists teach that men in the O.T. were saved by faith in a revelation peculiar to their dispensation, but this did not include faith in the Messiah as their sin-bearer.	20. All men who have ever been saved have been saved by faith in Christ as their sin-bearer, which has been progressively revealed in every age.
21. The O.T. sacrifices were not recognized as the Gospel or types of the Messiah as sin-bearer, but only seen as such in retrospect.	21. O. T. believers believed in the Gospel of Messiah as sin-bearer mainly by the sacrifices as types and prophecies.
22. The Holy Spirit indwells only believers in the dispensation of Grace, not O.T. and not after the Rapture.	22. The Holy Spirit has indwelt believers in all ages, especially in the present N. T. era, and will not be withdrawn.
23. Jesus made an offer of the literal Kingdom to Israel; since Israel rejected it, it is postponed.	23. Jesus made only an offer of the spiritual Kingdom, which was rejected by literal Israel but has gradually been accepted by spiritual Israel.
24. O.T. believers were not in Christ, not part of the Body or Bride of Christ.	24. Believers in all ages are all “in Christ” and part of the Body and Bride of Christ.
25. The Law has been abolished. Dispensationalists maintain that if one is required to keep the moral aspect of the Law, he is required to keep all the civil and ceremonial regulations as well.	25. The Law has 3 uses: to restrain sin in society, to lead to Christ, and to instruct Christians in Godliness. The ceremonial Laws have been abolished; the civil laws have been abolished except for their general equity; the moral laws (10 commandments) continue.
26. O. T. laws are no longer in effect unless repeated in the N.T.	26. O. T. laws are still in effect unless abrogated in the N.T.
27. The Millennium is the Kingdom of heaven in classical Dispensationism; current version regards Kingdom of Heaven and “of God” as the same. Dispensationalists are always Pre-Millennial and usually Pre-Tribulational.	27. The Church is the Kingdom of God. Covenanters are usually Amillennial, sometimes Pre-Millennial or Post-Millennial, rarely Pre-Tribulational.
28. The O.T. animal sacrifices will be restored in the Millennium.	28. The O. T. sacrifices were fulfilled and forever abolished in Christ.
29. The Millennium will fulfill the Covenant to Abraham. Israel has a future.	29. Christ fulfilled the Covenant to Abraham. Some Covenanters believe in a future for literal Israel, most don’t.
30. David will sit on the Millennial throne in Jerusalem.	30. Christ alone sits on the throne. Saints rule under Him.
31. “Kingdom of heaven” and “Kingdom of God” are NOT that same. The first is earthly, the second is spiritual.	31. “Kingdom of heaven” and “Kingdom of God” are that same.
32. The theme of the Bible is the glory of God through the demonstration that He alone is sovereign. Dispensationalists believe the salvation of man is an important part of God’s purpose, but that God has many other programs contributing something to the ultimate purpose of history. Thus, the ultimate purpose of history has to be large enough to incorporate all of God’s programs, not just one of them; that God alone is sovereign is the only purpose of doing that.	32. The theme of the bible is the glory of God by the salvation of man
33. Saints are differentiated. There are Old Testament, Church, Tribulation and Millennial saints.	33. Saints are the same in all time periods
34. The Resurrection – Christ became what in Himself He had not been before, the federal Head of a wholly new order of beings and these the primary divine objective as this is set forth in the New Testament	34. The Resurrection – His necessary return from the sphere of death back to the place which He occupied before; thus of little doctrinal significance. Why should any emphasis be placed on the limitless achievements of Christ’s present ministry when, according to C.T., saints of former ages were equally blessed with the saints of this age? This would bring disorder and confusion to this man-made theory.
35. The Ascension and Session - Exercise of Universal authority, Head over all thing to the Church, Bestower of Gifts, Intercessor, Advocate, Builder	35. The Ascension and Session – His necessary return from the sphere of death back to the place which He occupied before; thus of little doctrinal significance. Why should any emphasis be placed on the limitless achievements of Christ’s present ministry when, according to C.T., saints of former ages were equally blessed with the saints of this age? This would bring disorder and confusion to this man-made theory.

 

[Carbon]

Too general a statement to comment upon.

Okay.

My point is the dispensationalism uses a literal interpretation much more than covenant theology.

Covenant theology takes the bible literal also. But we let it do the talking and let scripture interpret scripture

 

[TMSO]

I have read that dispensationalists believe they have the key in the seventy-weeks prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27, to all the new testament prophecys. However, if you take this waway from them, ther whole system colapses.

Their interpretation of Daniel 9, proves they interpret the new testament in light of the old testament. Which is completly backwards.

Dispensationalists confuse Christ with the antichrist. In Daniel 9:27, the he that confirms a covenent with many they claim to be the antichrist. However, the he is Christ.

Consider two parts of the prophecy. "26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the [aa]Messiah will be cut off and have [ab]nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And [ac]its end will come with a flood; even to the end [ad]there will be war; desolations are determined. "
"27 And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of [ae]abominations will come one who [af]makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who [ag]makes desolate.”"

First consideration: Simple. There is a lot more then seven years between 33 AD (or even 40AD) and 70AD. The prophecy has already established defined parameters. 70 weeks. When considering the prophecy, it becomes evident that one week is seven years. So, now that the weeks have been defined, how can we get from Jesus death (Messiah is cut off with nothing) to 70 AD in seven years? The length of the prophecy has already been defined. One week is seven years. The sixty-ninth year ends at the triumphal entry of 35 AD I believe. (I may have the year wrong). Someone did the calculations. The big thing to remember is what Jesus said at the end of his time in Jerusalem. "39 For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’”"

Second consideration: Why does God tell Daniel that "the people of the prince who is to come" will destroy the city, if the prince who is to come has no role to play, if the prince isn't "to come"? Did God speak presumptuously, or is the prince "to come"? And, if one reads the prophecy as written, this one who is to come comes after 70AD. Why? The city is destroyed in 70AD by the people of the prince who is to come. He isn't there. He hasn't come yet. The seventieth week had not happened yet in 70AD, because the city and sanctuary were only destroyed in 70AD, and that was part of "after the sixty second week" (to which is added the seven weeks for sixty nine weeks). We have a gap. A gap built in by God that even the ECFs didn't miss. There is a reason why it says "and he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week." That marks the beginning of the final week of the prophecy. It isn't called the seventieth week because it wasn't a continuous seventy weeks.

So, the question is, just how long after AD 70 until the seventieth week started, or, as I believe, will start? If you believe the seventieth week ended before AD 70, consider the end state God decreed: " to [u]finish the transgression, to [v]make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and [w]prophecy and to anoint the most holy place."

Thoughts?

 

[Mr GLee]

The OT is types of shadows and the NT is the fulfillment. God only has one plan.

I believe you would carry this too far.

Thanks..

One plan. . . purposed by two laws of the prophecy working as one perfect . Old and testimony with new. Moses the law Elias passed to John the Baptist the testimony The whole revelation

Yes the fulfillment. both working as if one. (sola scriptura)

The alternative pray to dead relative or the famous as oral tradition of dying mankind (necromancy) seeking the dead for the living .(patron saints law as a oral tradition of fathers "dying mankind" )

If mankind does not hear both the old and new testament .Then they have no part in the gospel .

Isaiah 8:19-20 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word,(one) it is because there is no light in them

 

[Josheb]

@fastfredy0,

Source for posts 9 & 10? This goes right along with my op describing how DPism compromises core doctrine. If you don't mind, I'm going to put a link there to those two posts.

 

[fastfredy0]

Source for posts 9 & 10?

Well, I made notes from my studies and made an effort to say what the source was, but I didn't record the source of the information in posts 9 & 10. My bad.

 

[Josheb]

Well, I made notes from my studies and made an effort to say what the source was, but I didn't record the source of the information in posts 9 & 10. My bad.

No worries. I'm always looking to add resources to my repertoire, especially one eschatology and soteriology.

 

[TMSO]

Too general a statement to comment upon.

My point is the dispensationalism uses a literal interpretation much more than covenant theology. I am not saying which system is right or wrong more often. I am saying the a non-literal translation can be abused more than a literal translation.
Now, if 80-100% of the bible should not be understood for what it literally says, then the more non-literal Covenant hermeneutic would seem to have an edge.
A non-literal translation can be abused more than a literal one. Again, this is not proof of the Dispensational or Covenant system being superior.
I'm not taking a side. I'm just pointing out there is another side.

DISPENSATIONALISM	COVENANT THEOLOGY
1. Originally Calvinist; now it may be Arminian or modified Calvinist. Almost never 5-point Calvinist.	1. Always Calvinist. Usually 5-point.
2. Stresses “literal” interpretation of the Bible. Note: ALL prophecy that has been fulfilled has done so in a natural, literal and grammatical sense without exception. There are over 400 prophecies of which, perhaps, seven could arguably be fulfilled allegorically.	2. Accepts both literal and figurative interpretation of the Bible. Note: ALL prophecy that has been fulfilled has done so in a natural, literal and grammatical sense without exception.
3. Usually does not accept the idea of the “Analogy of Faith.” (the interpretation of each passage in conformity with the whole tenor of revealed truth)	3. Almost always accepts the idea of The “Analogy of Faith.” (the interpretation of each passage in conformity with the whole tenor of revealed truth)
4. “Israel” always means only the literal, physical descendants of Jacob. (see Israel and the Church Compared)	4. “Israel” may mean either literal, physical descendants of Jacob or the figurative, spiritual Israel, depending on context.
5. “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16 means physical Israel alone.	5. “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16 means the spiritual Israel, parallel to Galatians 3:29; Romans 2:28-29, Romans 9:6; Philippians 3:3.
6. God has 2 peoples with 2 separate destinies: Israel (earthly) and the Church (heavenly).	6. God has always had only 1 people, the Church gradually developed. (see note at bottom) The dispensationalist argues: Why the direct and unconditional demand of a new birth upon one with the Judaist character that Nicodemus represented? Why the emphasized account of the salvation of Saul of Tarsus who had lived in all good conscience before the law (Judaism) Why the salvation of the apostles and 3,000 Jews on the Day of Pentecost and many obedient priests. Would not one of these be saved through Judaism?
7. The Church was born at Pentecost at the coming of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2	7. The Church began in O. T. (Acts 7:38) and reached fulfillment in the N. T. (This contradicts Matthew 16:18 in which Jesus say “I will (future tense) build my church”
8 The Church was not prophesied as such in the O.T. but was a hidden mystery until the N.T.	8. There are many O. T. prophecies of the N. T. Church.
9. All O.T. prophecies for 'Israel' are for literal Israel, not the Church.'	9. Some O. T. prophecies are for literal Israel, others are for spiritual Israel.
10. God's main purpose in history is literal Israel.	10. God’s main purpose in history is Christ and secondarily the Church.
11. The Church is a parenthesis in God's program for the ages and was initiated and will end in the current dispensation.	11. The Church is the culmination of God’s saving purpose for the ages.
12. The main heir to Abraham's covenant was Isaac and literal Israel. (Christians are Abrahams spiritual seed (Galatians 3:29) because when one believes, he is baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ, who is the seed of Abraham.	12. The main heir to Abraham’s covenant and was Christ and spiritual Israel.
13. There was no eternal Covenant of Redemption within the Trinity.	13. The eternal Covenant of Redemption was within the Trinity to effect election.
14. There was no Covenant of Works with Adam in the Garden of Eden.	14. God made a conditional Covenant of Works with Adam as representative for all his posterity.

6. Two peoples, but only one destiny. That destiny is reached down different paths, but why not ignore what Paul said about two different paths?

 

[Josheb]

6. Two peoples, but only one destiny. That destiny is reached down different paths, but why not ignore what Paul said about two different paths?

Briefly please, what is that "destiny" and what are the two "different paths"?




.