Deuteronomy

SCROLL TO BOTTOM FOR CONTENT THREADS.

Prior Book \| Prior Chapter \| Prior Verse \| Next Verse \| Next Chapter \| Next Book \| Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015
NASB	Deuteronomy 19:21 "Thus you shall not show pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
AMPLIFIED 2015	Deuteronomy 19:21 "You shall not show pity [to the guilty one]: it shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

SCROLL TO BOTTOM FOR CONTENT THREADS.

Subject: Harmonizing the Word Hermeneutically

Bible Note: First I'm not a "dispensationalist" so I'm certainly not prepared to evaluate any definition of it.

I do clearly see differences of God's interactions with man. I don't see these as God tried this and it failed so God moved on and tried that. I see situations, different social/geopolitical situations that God used to interact with man.

To me the biggest mention of dispensation theology mostly comes in connection with AG position on "End Times" .

We believe in a Rapture, in a Tribulation, in a Second common and in a Millennium. I see Isreal's involvement in the End Times,

Howver I'm finding myself less certain that Daniel 9:27 should be applied to the Book of Revelation to establish a time line for the Book of Revelations.

What struck me odd and initially brought me into this discussion is your demand for a "confessional/creed" to establish the validity of the doctrine of dsipensationalism. It was if you were saying for a doctrine to be valid it must be included in some sort of decree by man. Again to me that appeared in opposition to the Reformed position that man was able to decide for himself what the scripture was saying. That man did not need the "church" to tell him what was true or false.

To summarize my confusion, it involves the Reformers rejection of the Catholic Catechism as manufactured by man but then totally accept the Westchester confession which again is manufactured by man. Where does man's own understanding of scripture come into Reformation theology?

I hope I clearly stated my confusion not as a challenge or against but rather a loss to see one of the primary tenets of the reformation in actual use.