Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | The Christian and the Law of God | NT general Archive 1 | Chris | 7780 | ||
Lionstrong, I didn't take your last comments in a negative tone, but I wanted to ask, did you mean to suggest that dispensationalist are 'followers' of Scofield, or simply mean we follow the teaching he popularized? "In 1965, Dr. Charles Ryrie refocused dispensationalism. He suggested that what was essential to dispensationalism was not necessarily a specific prophetic timetable or belief in a certain number of dispensations. The essence of dispensationalism was a threefold sine qua non: 1. an understanding that the basic purpose of God's plan in history is manifesting His own glory, 2. a consistent employment of a normal or plain interpretation of the Scriptures,(This plain interpretation includes the correct identification and interpretation of figures of speech, symbols, and apocalyptic imagery. The problem is that the covenant theologians and other non-dispensationalists identification of these figures is much broader than the dispensationalist interpretation and is inconsistently applied. (Robert Dean Jr.)) 3. and a distinction between God's plan for ethnic and national Israel and the New Testament Church." (Essentials of Dispensational Theology,Robert Dean, Jr.) Lastly, I'd like to research your comments about Moral and Civil vs Ceremonial law in the New Testament. Could you give me the Scriptures that teach us that we are still under the Moral Law and no longer under the Ceremonial and Civil Law? Thanks, GOD bless! |
||||||
2 | The Christian and the Law of God | NT general Archive 1 | Lionstrong | 7823 | ||
Chris, greetings: God's people in this dispensation (we can use dispensation without being dispensational :)) are still under the Law of God as summarized in the Ten Commandments. The principle of interpretation is, if God hasn't changed it, it's still in effect. I've seen in your other posting on a related subject the verses you've referenced which abolish ceremonial laws given to the Old Testament people of God (although you've applied it to all the OT laws). So, there's no need to show you what you already believe. If God has abolished all OT laws, then there no need to prove that he's abolished some. However, there is a need to prove by Scripture that he has not abolished all. Much more can, and probably will and should been sighted to support this position from Scripture, but what does it for me is the Gospel. .......... You see, the Gospel teaches that we should " deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. (Titus 2:12-14) (You notice it says lawless?) Without the law, righteous living makes no sense, because sin is lawlessness. (1 John 3:4) So, without the law sin makes no sense. Sin is defined by the law. Why is it wrong to worship idols, to blaspheme, to murder and steal, to be unbelieving, if it isn't a violation of Christ's moral commands? ............... One believer defined sin as whatever is not of faith (Rom. 14:23), but faithlessness is an instance of sin, not its definition. Paul says whatever is not of faith is sin, not sin is whatever is not of faith. I hope you see the difference, Chris. One member of the forum did not understand that a grammatical statement using "is" not the same as a mathematical equation using "is." ................ So, if we are called and chosen to be holy, to not live in sin, and if sin is lawlessness, then the Law is still operative. |
||||||