All Discussion PAGE 504

GiGi It would seem we should be asking them some questions now GiGi, since Spencer's 5 page post to Chris. Mainly about something they both agreed that they do believe tonight. Its on page 5, and it says "I use a consistent, literal, face-value method of interpretation and understanding the entire Word of God, including prophecy. In other words "God says what He means, and means what He says" so I can take what He says at face value". Spencer and Chris believe in the literal interpretation of the Word of God yet if I'm not mistaken they both believe Jesus will come back like a thief in the night, a (secret rapture) when ( 1.Thes.4:16 ) is very clear He comes with a SHOUT, with the voice of the archangel, and with the (TRUMP OF GOD.) How can one say I believe in the literal interpretation of the Word of God and think this is a silent return? What about "God says what He means, and means what He says"? What about so I can take what He says at face value? I do agree with those words completely, EVERY WORD OF GOD IS PURE!! I'm sorry and certainly don't mean to offend anyone here but to say you take the Word of God literally and you believe God says what He means, and means what He says. And you both defend a pre-tribulation rapture as strongly as you do with absolutely zero verses that literally say the rapture, the return of Jesus in the clouds to gather His church is before the tribulation! And many just like 1.Thes.4:16 being a silent return, which just makes no sense at all. And you could say is almost the opposite of literal. You are saying you take the Words literally, but your beliefs are not in alignment with your words. I'm pointing this out with love as we are all children of God, please don't be offended. But please consider my words. Gal.6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Blessings.

Ruby Lea,

We are so far apart in our thinking on the Word that I think it is fruitless to continue conversing tonight.

And you haven't answered my question: Are you Earl Bowman: yes or no?

S. Spencer

Where are your Scriptures to back up these tenets?

Oh Jesse, we are not enemies.

I have been challenged by S. Spencer to speak my views using Scriptures. So I have done that. I do not see these discussions are arguing nor being pointless. We do need to speak as clearly as we are able to things that are of importance. And eschatology seems to be a very popular topic on here (more than it needs to be, in my opinion, but important anyway). I don't think there is anything wrong with responding to another's post in disagreement. People have done that to me plenty of times and I don't mind. But this topic seems to be very sensitive to some who post regularly here and so just don't like what I say in disagreement.

Jesse, I do not wish to speak to the first part of your post because I think it will be fruitless to do so. I think we have plenty that we agree on. I do think like you that it is each person's responsibility to check what people say on here with Scripture. I don't think a one needs to post Scripture with every response. People can look up a topic to find Scriptures that speak to it. But on the other hand I do think it is good and helpful to include Scripture when presenting one's viewpoint.

And yes, people interpret Scriptures in many differing ways. But how can that be if the Holy Spirit supposedly is going to teach us all things without the help of others, as some repeatedly say on here. I know that people who have different interpretations cannot both be correct. I wish there could be harmony and unity of belief in the Church today. But we are far past that.

God will sift each of us in the time he allots to do so. May we all not be hard=hearted and stiff=necked when He brings this sifting to us.

Have a good evening. I always appreciate your posts. Thanks for your contribution.

Jesse The verse says "Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (FROM THIS GENERATION) for ever. (God tells us in this verse ((from this generation)) for ever. With your reply and the question you asked Jesse it almost sounds like you don't believe Gods promise to preserve His Word for ever was kept? Do you? If you do believe God kept His Word, WHERE IS IT TODAY? ( Ps.12:6 ) The words of the LORD are (pure) words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. The word (pure) is #2889; it means pure (in a chemical, ceremonial, or moral sense) sound, clear, ((unadulterated)), ((uncontaminated)), innocent or holy. God did keep that promise in the KJB! A (time) in the Bible is 1 year, ( Rev.12:14 ) ( Dan.7:25 ) Ps.12:6 tells us Gods Word was tried in a furnace of earth, purified (seven) times. (That would be 7 years) The KJB took 7 years to complete its translation! Every Word of God is pure, How did God get His Word preserved into the KJB you might ask? The answer is in ( 2.Peter1:19-21 ) Here's another proof its pure, and not corrupted. ( Jer.23:36 ) And the burden of the LORD shall ye mention no more: for every mans word shall be his burden; for ye have (perverted) ((the words of the living God)), of the LORD of hosts our God. The word (perverted) is #2015; it means to turn about or over, by implying to change, overturn, pervert, change, perverse. (God said this of pastors who destroy and scatter His sheep, and false prophets, the word (perverted) means to change. God said ye have changed the words of the living God, ALL modern version Bibles have changed the Words of the living God!) There is much more that proves the KJB is the pure preserved Word of God. Jesse, I noticed you completely ignored my comment on the (body) that was (taken) in ( Lu.17:37 ) being those "safe," the saved or delivered ones whom Jesus received unto himself. Thats just another one of them holes in that theory. But this one is a BIG hole! Thank you Jesse.

Chris I agree that we have spoken enough on this topic for now. This is not something I will have consensus with you or S. Spencer, or Jesse, or Giannis, or many others on here. All I can say is 'test all things".

GIGI,

1 Corinthians 2:13

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

Matthew 13:10-17

And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.

Matthew 13:34,35

All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

Psalms 78:2

I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:

Habakkuk 2:3

For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.

Good Evening, One Eighty

After reading your posts, I will add this Scripture section:

John 1:1-4, 14

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life...

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth."

These verses say that Jesus was the Word with the Father and is God long with the Father, being His begotten Son, not made, but all things were made through Jesus.

Then it says the the Word became flesh and dwelt on earth with men who are physical beings.

You deny this about Jesus.

If Jesus was only a Spirit then He did not truly die nor shed His blood for the forgiveness of sins. So if you believe He is only a Spirit, then you deny his saving sacrifice of his fleshly life for us to bring forgiveness of sins, reconcile us to the Father, and give us eternal life.

Your beliefs deny two of the most essential beliefs of the Christian faith. Therefore, I will say that you are not a Christian and you are not saved.

If you think life is unreal, then you are an illusion and not real. And so there was not reason for Jesus to die for something that is not a reality. And if your physical life is not a reality, then everything about your life, your thoughts actions, feelings, words, are all non-existent, too. So, how is this non-existence, One eighty?

You are very fooled by your philosophy. It is not Christian by any stretch of the imagination. So, I urge you to be open to the thought that you may be in grave error and in jeopardy of spending eternity separated from God in a real physical lake of fire to receive God's wrath forever.

I am sorry to have to say this to you. But your own words have shown where you stand before Jesus our Lord, and it is not in the way of salvation.

That "Stone" is Christ.

You will find this in Acts 4:10-12 which itself is the confirmation Matthew 21:42 and Psalm 118:22-23 and 1 Peter 2:6-7

- - - - - - - - - - - -

The difference in severity can be taken from above.

If Christ is that Stone (which he is), then even common sense teaches that it is far better to fall on a stone than for a stone to fall on you.

Then I would opt out, because picking one over another is equivalent to saying a certain word of the Lord is more favorable than another.

Brother Spencer,

I'm a slow reader, so I just finished reading through what you shared from Chuck Missler. Thank you so much for that. I now have a better understanding. I used to listen to Chuck Missler every morning on my way to work (0630-0700). That was about 20 years ago. I also listened to Greg Laurie. And on my way home, I would listen to Raul Ries. There was also a program called "To Every Man an Answer." Not sure if that program is still on the radio or not? But Chuck Missler in my opinion is a great teacher!

Thanks again for sharing this!

I need prayer for good health for my wife as we go to the doctor tomorrow. And prayers for my strength.

Blessings GiGi,

Direct quote from scripture: John 4:24 God is Spirit. John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of Spirit is spirit. John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I (Jesus) speak unto you are spirit, and they are life.

God is Spirit. Where in the scriptures does it say God, i.e. Creator, is Flesh; and they that worship Him must worship Him in FLESH and in truth? If Christ was born of flesh, then He wasn't born of God; nor would He be Spirit because Spirit would not be an option if Christ was created flesh. John 3:6 contains two opposite parts to its statement and clearly leaves no room that both options are simultaneously possible, nor that each entity can produce something other than what it is, or change back and forth, or be mixed together, which means coexist. John 6:63 is clear that the words Jesus speaks, which is truth, are spirit and life. NOT flesh and death, which would obviously be untruth.

James 3:11, 12 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? Can a fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a (grape) vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh. The REASON this is truth is because in reality, the Mind of God can not and will not produce opposing, dualistic thoughts. A mouse can't produce mice and elephants. When thinking in terms of opposites (dualistic mind) we inevitably WILL have bitter (impure) thoughts and sweet (pure) thoughts, and of course project this insane way of thinking onto God. 1 John 4:8 says "God is Love." Where in scripture does it say, God is Hate? I don't require any more scripture to make the statement "Love creates Itself and nothing but Itself."

For now, I'll stick with Jesus APPEARED as a body, with the fullness of Christ Mind as One with His Mind; not His body. If we were frogs He would have appeared as a frog.

God Is

Peace

Wow, brother S. Spencer, what a great read. Thank you so much for looking into this subject & posting it here. It should be of great help to any wanting to, not only understand this word (Dispensation), but also to check to see how they are reading & digesting biblical Truth. All I can state, is that I agree fully with every thing that Chuck has briefly written on this subject, & hopefully be useful to many as to how they handle God's Word.

Jimbob,

To answer your question about the King James Bible, I believe it is an English translation, just like any other English translation. It is my bible of choice, not that I believe it is a perfect translation, but I believe it is the best English translation there is. I also believe that there are other good translations out there.

From your posts in the past, I perceive that you are "KJV only." I could be mistaken on that though. But the KJV is not a perfect translation. I believe it's the best translation, but it is not a perfect translation. When I study the King James side by side with the Textus Receptus (NT only/Septuagint for the OT), I find many things that the English bible says which differs from what the Greek text is saying. And like I said, English is a very general language. Many words in English can have multiple meanings which is why we have so many disagreements as to what the English text is saying.

It's also the reason why we have so many different denominations out there. People cannot agree on what the English bible is saying. But not so with the Greek. Greek is such an exact language. It's very difficult to come up with multiple meanings on what the Greek text is saying, unlike English. Most of us read the King James, but again, it is written in English which is a very general language. The same goes for Hebrew. Hebrew is also a general language.



Yes, God did promise to preserve His Word forever, but the King James didn't exist before 1611. How was His word preserved before the King James Bible came along?

Page 2 (to GiGi).

Then in regards to that understanding somehow affecting or influencing my belief in the pre-trib rapture, I simply don't see the connection. I, as also brothers S. Spencer, Jesse, & Giannis, & others here have arrived at this position because of what we read in the Word. As I mentioned in previous posts, if certain Scriptures weren't present to help us in this matter, I would certainly hold to a post-trib position, as there is much to support that view. But then I would have to avoid these other Scriptures that show us something more (about the Church's position pre & post tribulation).

Anyway, we have discussed all this at great length, with all the Scriptures presented with yourself & Jimbob, and even with the Scriptures we cited, we still find reason to read & apply them differently; and for me, dispensational truth doesn't affect my reading & understanding of this subject, as I haven't seen that connection. Maybe, you believe that since I've subjected myself to Larkin's diagrams on the Church's position in the World, that these illustrations have planted my belief firmly in the pre-trib camp.

Not at all, and as stated, I consider all what is presented, but unless supported in the Word, it is to be rejected as spurious. Just as someone who denies the Triunity of God: we all read from the same Word, the same verses, but amazingly we can't find agreement on this important doctrine (to some it's clear as black & white; to others, very faint, fuzzy, or even non-existent). We can only then plead the Spirit's Help & guidance to apprehend the Truth. So thanks again GiGi for your contributions, for your wishes for my travel, & will continue to lay up your family matters before the Lord.

You're doing the right thing by reaching out.

Page 1.

Thanks GiGi for your responses. I'm glad that your son & his wife have returned safely back home; that at least, would have lifted a little concern off your heart. In the official/traditional sense, a Muslim woman can only marry a Muslim man, though it doesn't have to be the other way around. So maybe, his 'conversion' was simply a nominal agreement to become one, which certainly involved the repeating, with belief, in the 'Shahada" (the public declaration of 'Muslim' faith that all Muslims must adhere to and by doing so, one is considered a Muslim). I won't repeat that declaration here, but I would agree to the first part of it, but certainly not the second - you can check that out on the Web.

Re: Dispensational Truth. I heard about the seven dispensations seen in the Bible, but only saw it in detail in Larkin's book so that I could read more about it. His diagrams were particularly fascinating as he illustrated the biblical epochs related to specific subjects. I was only able to have a brief look at that book as it was borrowed from our Fellowship's library. I wouldn't say that "that education has colored 'my' approach to Scripture since then", since, like yourself, we will always test anything we learn with the Word of God - and this is a MUST. And at least at that basic level of understanding of dispensational truth, I saw absolutely no conflict at all with the Word, just as I would test & then accept a preacher's message or a commentary. I say, 'if it's true to the Word & helpful, then use it'.

I cried after I read your prayer request. I thought about it for a moment, and it just really hit me. You have so much love to give and so much light to shine to the World. I definitely prayed for you. I hope you had a good day, and I hope things get better for you. These girls probably are just jealous of you in some way. Maybe they are hurt themselves. Please, just try and keep your chin up, so to speak. Do good things to make yourself feel good. It may be hard, but don't let them get the best of you. I want to say that it'll go away with time. You don't know what good times and good things are yet to come in your life! I hope this is encouraging to you.

(Part 3):

GiGi,

During the tribulation period, people are going to have to make a decision. Do they heed to the voice of the 144,000 Jewish evangelists, the angel flying in mid-heaven who reaches the entire world, warning them not to receive the mark, and the two witnesses? It's going to be a tough choice to make. Do they surrender their life to Christ even though it will cost their life life by being beheaded, or do they take the mark of the beast and forfeit any hope for salvation?

GiGi, I hope I have not become your enemy because I believe in a pre-tribulation rapture? There are things non-rapture related that you have stated in the past that I find no scriptural proof of, but I choose to leave it alone because it has no impact on a believer's salvation. Whether one believes in pre/mid/or post rapture, that belief will not cost them their salvation!

The bottom line is we do agree that there will be a rapture. We just don't agree on the timing. I truly mean this when I say that I have absolutely no issue with you or anyone else who believes that they will be here during the tribulation period. For myself, there are too many questions that need to be answered for me to change my belief.

We know this question will come up again. It seems to be a very popular question. But the question is, how do we approach it? How do we respond? Do we (everyone who wishes to answer) share our understanding, even though our understanding might conflict with someone else's, and then let the person who asked the question search the scriptures for themselves to see if what we are saying is true (Which is what they should be doing anyway), or, do we wait to see whose responses differs from ours, and then spend weeks arguing amongst each other on the matter?

It is my conviction that what we share here with others, they have a responsibility to search the scripture for themselves to see if what we are giving them is true.



May the Lord continue to bless you and your family!

(Part 2):

GiGi,

Matthew 24:14 says, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." There are churches out there that say that Jesus would have come by now had the church been doing its job, because once the whole world is reached for Christ, then He is going to come. I've heard people actually say this.

But during the tribulation, there will not be a need for the church to be out spreading the gospel message. If I remember correctly, I believe in one of your posts you had mentioned to someone that if the church is gone during the tribulation, how are people going to be reached with the gospel message? Those were not your exact words but something of that sort.

Well, in the book of Revelation, it tells us how the world is going to be reached. It tells us that there will be 144,000 Jews, 12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel, that are sealed by God so that they cannot be killed. No one can harm them. They are Jewish believers, and I believe that they will be evangelists during the tribulation period, 144,000 of them.

Secondly, there will be an angel flying in mid-heaven, according to Revelation Chapter 14:6-7. It says that there will be an angel flying in mid-heaven for 3 years. And Revelation 14:6 tells us that he reaches every single person on the earth with the gospel, everybody!

And then in Revelation 11:3-13, there are two witnesses that are witnessing in the streets of Jerusalem, and the whole world sees them. Our technology today makes that possible. So, everyone will be reached before His second coming. God Himself will fulfill that promise.

Lord willing, I will finish this up with one more post, I promise!

Hello GiGi,

You have completely misrepresented my words. If you are referring to what Jesus said in Acts 1:8, then yes, I agree, it would be a big mistake on my part to believe that we as believers do not have a responsibility to represent Christ throughout the world. What I said had nothing to do with that. And I am not saying that we as believers do not have a responsibility to be witnesses of Jesus Christ.

In Acts 1:8, Jesus says you are going to receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you. There's a difference in texts when He says you shall be witnesses unto me. Some manuscripts say of me, the Genitive Case. He says you'll be my witnesses, not witnesses for me. But either one that you use, it is interesting that it is presented as fact. It doesn't say that when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, you ought to be, or you should be. He says you will be my witnesses.

That's because at the end of John Chapters 14 and 16, He says when the Holy Spirit comes, He will testify of me. It is the Holy Spirit in every believer that testifies to Christ through the believer. We don't testify. We don't ever bring anybody to Christ. It's the Holy Spirit through us. So, you will be my witnesses, factual statement!

And you are also correct in saying that "Saints are spoken of again and again in Revelation, and saints are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews of Gentiles." I have never once said that there will not be any saints during the tribulation period. The book of Revelation speaks of many who will be saved during the tribulation. Those who are saved during the tribulation will become saints, but it will cost them their lives.

Need more space, will continue...

Gigi:

I will address all four verses: IT'S PROPHECY

Psalms 82:5 They know not neither do they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

Psalms 82:6 I have said ye are gods, the children of the most high.

Psalms 82:7 But ye shall DIE like men, and fall like of of the princes.

Psalms 82:8 Arise, O God, judge the earth; for thou shall inherit the nations.

Verse 5 is the condition the world finds itself in, so Christ prophesies what he will do to correct the condition of the world, this is what he was telling the Pharisees, he was quoting these verses in Psalms 82:5-8.

Verse 7, he said he will come and DIE like a man, and fall like one of the princes, be crucified.

verse 8 ARISE (from the grave), O Lord, and JUDGE the earth, and INHERIT ALL NATION, the kingdoms of this world became the KINGDOM of GOD when he was resurrected.

verse 6 and the children of the resurrection became gods also, to judge the world with Christ.

Obadiah 1:21 And saviours shall COME (by resurrection) upon Mount Zion to JUDGE the Mount of Esau ....

You can not know how to judge the world with being the EXACTNESS of CHRIST, this is the WORK of the CROSS, to accomplish the creation of SONS of GOD.

There was only ONE body that was RESURRECTED, that Body was CHRIST, we are NOW the BODY of CHRIST; a union of wedlock, the husband and wife MADE ONE.

God Bless YOU!

Brother Chris.

Part 5 of 5.

The Pre-tribulation Rapture is part of the normative dispensational eschatology, although it isn't essential to being a dispensationalist. It is derived from a literal interpretation of Scripture and is based on the distinction between Israel and the Church and the teaching regarding the imminency of the return of the Lord.

Dispensationalist Checklist

Are you a dispensationalist? If you completely agree with the first item on the checklist below, you are a dispensationalist, because everything that follows flows naturally from a con-sistent, literal, plain and normal interpretation of Scripture.

I agree with the three Sine Qua Non of Normative/Classical Dispensationalism:

__ I use a consistent, literal, face-value method of interpretation and understanding the entire Word of God, including prophecy. In other words-"God says what He means, and means what He says," so I can take what He says at face value.

__ I believe there is a distinction between the Nation of Israel and the Church (The Ekklesia of Christ).

__ I believe the underlying purpose of everything is for the Glory of God.

I also agree with most or all of the following:

__ The Premillennial view of the 2nd Coming of Christ, which inaugurates the thousand-year literal reign of the Messiah (Jesus Christ) with a rod of iron on the throne of David.

__ The literal fulfillment of prophecy including eschatology (the fulfillment of prophecies in the end times).

__ The literal fulfillment of the promises in the covenants to the Nation of Israel.

__ The Pre-trib Rapture of the Body of Christ.

End article.

The opposite of dispensationalism is covenantalism.

God bless.

Jesse Thanks for the reply. First I would like to ask you if you believe the KJB is the preserved Word of God? Ps.12:6-7 is Gods promise to preserve His Word forever. We do have that preserved Word today or those verses would be a lie, God cannot lie. Now the focus has been on Luke.17:37 which you say the word (body) could mean either a living body, or a dead body or corpse. The word (body) in that verse is #4983; it means the body (as a sound whole) "safe" to save, i.e. deliver or protect, save. So this (body) spoken of here is "safe" saved, delivered. It doesn't mean a living body, or a dead body like you said Jesse. If you look at Luke.17:37 you see that its just ((after))the verses that say "one shall be taken, and the other left". And the meaning of (body) is "safe" to save, deliver or protect, save. This is not speaking of a carcass that the fowl of the air will be filled with their flesh. Does it? Those taken are safe, saved, delivered! Where you are confusing the word carcass with the word (body) is in Mt.24:28 where it says "For wheresoever the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together. But if we look at this verse it happens during the tribulation because the next verse says "Immediately after the tribulation". The verses that say "one shall be taken , and the other left" in Mt.Ch.24 comes AFTER this, which would be AFTER the tribulation. Now if we add the meaning of the word (taken) from Mt.24:40-41 (taken) it is #3880; it means to receive near, i.e. associate with oneself (in a familiar or ((intimate)) act or relation) So the (body) of those taken in Lu.17:37 are "safe" saved. delivered or protected. And the word (taken) in Mt,24:40-41 it means to receive near, intimate act or relation. Jn.14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, AND RECEIVE YOU UNTO MYSELF; that where I am, there ye may be also. The meaning of (taken) has the word (intimate) means a familiar friend, does that sound like a carcass to you? Blessings

Brother Chris

Part 4.

2. The distinctness of Israel and the Church (the Ekklesia of Christ) grows out of a consistent, literal hermeneutic. The church is a separate entity (separate from the nation of Israel) and is made up of Jewish and Gentile believers only. God has separate purposes, and separate destinies for Israel and the Church. A consistent literal or plain understanding of Scripture makes these distinctions.

3. The underlying purpose of God in the world-the glory of God. Although salvation is a primary theme of God's purpose in the world which brings glory to Him, it isn't the sole purpose of God in the world. It is only one of many.

In summary: "The essence of dispensationalism, then, is the distinction between Israel and the church. This grows out of the dispensationalist's consistent employment of normal or plain or historical-grammatical interpretation, and it reflects an understanding of the basic purpose of God in all His dealings with mankind as that of glorifying Himself through salvation and other purposes as well.

Additional Defining Characteristics

Another defining characteristic of dispensationalism is the literal fulfillment of the promises of the Old Testament covenants.

Taking these at face value using a literal interpretation leads naturally to the literal fulfillment of the promises given in these covenants. Many of the promises included in these covenants are yet to be fulfilled and are part of Eschatology-end time prophecy that has not occurred as yet.

The 1,000-year reign of Christ in the Millennium will be the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant. Everything that God promised to Abraham, to David and to Israel through the prophets will be fulfilled during the Millennial period.

Taking prophecy at face value leads naturally to a literal 1,000-year period where the Messiah will come to earth, set up His Kingdom and rule with a rod of iron from the throne of David. This is Premillennialism.

See Part 5.

Brother Chris.

Part 3.

In summary: "Dispensationalism views the world as a household run by God. In His household-world, God is dispensing or administering its affairs according to His own will and in various stages of revelation in the passage of time. These various stages mark off the distinguishably different economies in the outworking of His total purpose, and these different economies constitute the dispensation. The under-standing of God's differing economies is essential to a proper interpretation of His revelation within those various economies."2

The Sine Qua Non of Normative/Classical Dispensationalism

According to Dr. Charles Ryrie, there are three Sine Qua Non aspects of dispensationalism-which means they are aspects that are absolutely indispensable or essential to dispensationalism. These are characteristics of what is considered Normative or Classical Dispensationalism.

1. The consistent literal or plain interpretation of Scripture based on the plenary (inerrant) inspiration of the Scriptures using a Historical-Grammatical method of interpretation. The term "literal" is sometimes ironically taken too literally and then made fun of-you don't really believe God has feathers do you? ( Psalm 91:4 ). A better term would be understanding Scripture in the plain or normal meaning as opposed to allegorizing it. This is taking God's word at face value-God says what He means, and means what He says!

A literal interpretation of Scripture isn't solely the domain of dispensationalism, others non-dispensationalist including Covenant Theologians take a large amount of the Scripture literally or plainly, but it is the consistent use of a literal hermeneutic that defines dispensationalism. Not just for historical and doctrinal passages, but for prophetic passages as well. Covenant Theologians allegorize most of prophetic scripture and the promises of the unconditional covenants, especially if it relates to the nation of Israel.

See part 4.

Hey can you pray for healing in my body and for a fresh filling of the Holy Spirit?

I want to thank everyone who prayed for me. i just found out God gave me the gifts empathy and discernment. now i just need to know what to do with them.

Brother Chris.

Part 2.

Some dispensations can be divided up into smaller dispensations, and they can be given different names. However, one thing is clear, there are dispensations and they are governed by different over-arching themes.

There is also the matter of "carryovers" during the transition from one dispensation to another. Each dispensation commonly includes:

Certain ordinances that were valid and continue to be valid in the new dispensation. A good example is the command to not eat blood, first given to Noah ( Genesis 9:4), then to Moses ( Leviticus 3:17) and was even carried over into the so-called dispensation of Grace at the Council of Jerusalem ( Acts 15:29).

Other regulations that were valid until then are annulled and do not continue into the new dispensation. An example of this is the freedom to eat any meat, which is actually a reversal back to a previous dispensation where God commanded Noah to eat "every moving thing that liveth" ( Genesis 9:3).

New principles not valid before are introduced in the new dispensation. The Mosaic Law is a dramatic illustration of this. A large portion of the Law introduced new principles.

Promises given in one dispensation are carried over and fulfilled in another dispensation. Many of the promises to the nation of Israel, to Abraham and to David are yet to be fulfilled, but will be fulfilled during the Millennium.

Some things instituted in one dispensation may be elaborated or modified in a later dispensation. An excellent example of this is the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus takes the written laws one step further-not only is it wrong to murder, but if you hate, you have already committed murder in your heart.

See part 3.