[chette777]

I would like to point out for the record not everybody who uses Dispensational Study methods are Calvinists. this is a misnomer.

2tim2:15 tells us to study and how. rightly dividing or dispensationalism is dividing how God deals with men in different ways at different times. Basically dispensationalism is a method of study.

Premillenialist use it to show that God set aside Israel and is using the body of Christ today to reach the lost, then will rapture the church and Israel comes back into the picture.

Preterist use dispensationism to have God replaced Israel with the church, show the church must bring in the kingdom so Christ can come and take his place. they also either have teh church raptured midway or no tribulation at all saying we are already in tribulation.

So the Rightly dividing is needed. the key is rightly dividing by any true Biblisist will use Despensational study methods, you must take care not to over divide the scriptures.

I can send you Lewis Sperry Chafers dispensationlism a great book on the subject. send a private message if you want a copy

[Greektim]

chette, where did the calvinism issue come up? That was not even mentioned that I can recall. That said, most dispensationalists are moderate/modified/redefined calvinists. Salvation through faith in all dispensations (except innocence) is not just a calvinist teaching (if that is what you are referring to). Arminians, at least the academic kind, teach the same thing.

I would love a copy of Chafer's book. I am currently reading through his systematics right now. He is an oustanding writer. The more you read him, the more your own writing skills improve.

[Biblestudent]

Brother Easy E,

Some "dispensationalists" believe that Water Baptism is an Old Testament Jewish practice that should not be practiced during the Church Age. Others believe that the Lord's Supper is also a Jewish ordinance that is abolished on the cross.

However, I see in Scripture that Water Baptism and the Lord's Supper as given by Christ to Israel, through the Twelve, before the cross have a different purpose and meaning than that which were given by Christ to the Church, through Paul, after the ascension. There are ordinances that are given to us, which are NOT "contrary" or "against us" (Col. 2:14)

WATER BAPTISM as given before the cross and preached by the Twelve to Israel before and after the cross:
Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

WATER BAPTISM as received and practiced by Paul and delivered to the church:
Acts 16:15 And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us.
Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
Acts 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

Paul DID baptize, but he was not sent to baptize, as John the Baptist and the Twelve were sent to baptize. Mr. 1:4; Mt 28:18-20. The gospel preached by John the Baptist and the Twelve did include baptism, Mr 1:4; Mr 16:16; Ac 2:38; but Paul's preaching does not include it 1 Cor. 15:1-4; 1:17. Paul, however, gave water baptism as one of the local church "ordinances" (1 Cor. 11:2).

The LORD'S SUPPER in Matthew 26 pictures the Millennium (FUTURE):
Matthew 26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

The LORD'S SUPPER in 1 Corinthians 11 pictures Christ's death (PAST):

1 Corinthians 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

Notice again that Paul emphasizes that these are ordinances he received from the Lord Jesus Christ to be given to the Church:

1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
1 Corinthians 11:23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

I pray this helps!

[Brother Tim]

GreekTim elitely chided:
I wonder what you, who have not been formal[l]y trained, are seeing that the rest of us are not.

So dispensationalism cannot be understood be simply reading, studying, meditating and prayer. One must be "educated". No wonder it doesn't make sense to me. And here I thought that the Holy Spirit could lead me into all truth. What a shame!

[Brother Tim]

Luke asked in post #19:

Also, are you implying that Abraham had the 10 commandments, or the other Mosaic Laws?

No, not at all. I just find it curious that the wording of the verse seems to indicate that there was some kind of listing of specific rules (commandments, statutes, laws). Certainly they could have been oral, but it was just a hmmm thought. I was actually focusing on the fact that there were a set of laws for Abraham to obey. I do not think that they were Mosiac, though maybe a precursor to them.

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

So dispensationalism cannot be understood be simply reading, studying, meditating and prayer. One must be "educated". No wonder it doesn't make sense to me. And here I thought that the Holy Spirit could lead me into all truth. What a shame!

Bro. Tim, you don't need formal training to be a dispensationalist. There is hope for you yet.

[Brother Tim]

Brandon, by the time I figure it out, everything will have already happened!

[Greektim]

Originally Posted by Biblestudent

Some "dispensationalists" believe that Water Baptism is an Old Testament Jewish practice that should not be practiced during the Church Age.

This is not a true statement. THat is not a teaching maintained by any dispensationalist (which may be why you put it in quotation marks). That is a ultra/hyper-dispensational teaching. Those are not to be confused. We need to be clear. Brother Tim keeps hearing about all these variations in the system of Dispensationalism primarily b/c the variations are not dispensational at all.

[Easy E]

That is Biblestudent's point. These people call themselves "dispensationalists" when, in fact, they are not. They have taken proper division past its logical conclusion and have created an entirely different animal.

[Biblestudent]

Thanks, Easy E. That's why I enclosed it with quotation marks ("dispensationalists"). I tried to avoid just calling anybody "hyper" (although I believe they are), for sometimes anybody can just accuse anybody as a "hyper" if one seems to be more "dispensational" than he is.