[Biblestudent]

Winman,
According to Peter (Acts 3:19) are going to be blotted out "when the times of refreshing shall come". When is that?

Paul taught that in Christ we have -- present tense -- redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins (Col. 1:14). How then can Acts 3:19 be the same as the gospel that Paul preached?

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Biblestudent

Winman,
According to Peter (Acts 3:19) are going to be blotted out "when the times of refreshing shall come". When is that?

Paul taught that in Christ we have -- present tense -- redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins (Col. 1:14). How then can Acts 3:19 be the same as the gospel that Paul preached?

I guess, seen through a sound mind(common sense), that it is not the same gospel.

Grace and peace

Tony

[premio53]

Originally Posted by Biblestudent

Winman,
According to Peter (Acts 3:19) are going to be blotted out "when the times of refreshing shall come". When is that?

Paul taught that in Christ we have -- present tense -- redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins (Col. 1:14). How then can Acts 3:19 be the same as the gospel that Paul preached?

In the context it is obvious that Peter is talking about when Christ comes again, He will restore all things to their original perfection, before sin and the curse came into the world. Notice in verse 19 that Peter said "repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out." He did not add baptism showing it is not necessary fro salvation.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

I don't understand the obsession of trying to make Paul contradict Peter or Paul contradict the Lord Jesus.

Originally Posted by premio53

I don't understand the obsession of trying to make Paul contradict Peter or Paul contradict the Lord Jesus.

Me either brother...
and I happen to think Winman has a very sound mind.

[chette777]

I refer winman and all viewers to the thread rightly dividing the book of Acts under the thread heading Doctrines, as the questions as to the different gospels and different ministries of Peter, Paul and the Lord Jesus has already been discussed there. do no need to repeat everything here.

now does any one have questions of Dispensationalism? which by the ways is not the same as Rightly Dividing, but those who rightly divide generally will hold to forms of dispensationalism.

[Biblestudent]

Originally Posted by premio53

In the context it is obvious that Peter is talking about when Christ comes again, He will restore all things to their original perfection, before sin and the curse came into the world. Notice in verse 19 that Peter said "repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out." He did not add baptism showing it is not necessary fro salvation.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

I don't understand the obsession of trying to make Paul contradict Peter or Paul contradict the Lord Jesus.

premio53,
1. According to Peter, WHEN are sins going to be blotted out?
2. According to Paul, WHEN were sins forgiven?

The first question was left unanswered. Why?
Please

[George]

Originally Posted by Winman

Bro Parrish

"I also enjoyed those links. Now I understand some of the viewpoints of those I have been wrestling with here lately much better. I have been saying there is only one gospel, and Ruckman agrees.

I have been studying this on my own every night. And you know what? I came to the same conclusions as Ruckman. "

Aloha brother Winman,

IF brother Peter Ruckman is correct, (you seem to agree with him - at least in this case) and IF it is true that: "God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43"; then the QUESTION arises - WHAT was Peter "preaching" between Acts Chapter 1 and Acts Chapter 10, IF he did NOT "know" the "Gospel" UNTIL Acts 10:43?

[George]

Aloha all,

There have been many Dispensational “SYSTEMS” proposed by NUMEROUS Dispensationalist authors. I do not believe that any ONE of these “SYSTEMS” is 100% “correct”.

I am “leery” of ALL systems of biblical interpretation and theological formulations – simply because I do not believe that any man can “box in” the Scriptures and make them always “FIT” into their “SYSTEM” (i.e. Calvin, Gill, Spurgeon, Bullinger, Stam, Ruckman, etc.).

The word “Dispensation” is used only four (4) times in the Holy Bible. Since I believe in “rightly dividing the word of truth”, that automatically places me in the “Dispensationalists Camp”. But I do NOT push “Dispensationalism” (a “system” of biblical interpretation) – I try to emphasize the Holy Scriptures instead.

Since there are so FEW verses in the Bible with the word “dispensation” in them, when I teach about HOW God has dealt with men down though the ages; I prefer to emphasize God’s “COVENANTS” with men, rather than the “Dispensations” (since the word “dispensation” does NOT mean a period of time – as many Dispensationalists believe.)

There are many Dispensational “systems” and most of them are quite complex. I try to keep things simple (and at the same time “Biblical”), and so I have noticed that the one thing that is common in every single so-called “Dispensation” (or under every Covenant of God) is BELIEF and OBEDIENCE!

#1. In the Garden of Eden (Under the "Edenic" Covenant) - Adam was required to "believe" God (there was no "Faith" involved) and to obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Which Eve failed to do, and Adam (for Eve’s sake) joined her.}

#2. After the "Fall" (under the "Adamic" Covenant) - all that was required of people before the flood was for them to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Which by Noah's time - ONLY Noah did.}

#3. The same holds true for all those after the Flood under the "Noahic" Covenent. They were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Of whom Job would be the perfect “example”.}

#4. Under the "Abrahamic" Covenant - Abraham and all of his descendants were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID - ORALLY). {Which Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did – and some of their descendants.}

#5. Under the "Mosaic" Covenant - Moses and all of the Israelites were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID – both ORALLY and in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which Moses did (except for striking the “rock” at Kadesh.)}

#6. Under the "Davidic" Covenant - David and all of his descendants were to "believe" God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID – both ORALLY and in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which David did except in the matter of Uriah & Bathsheba, and the numbering of the children of Israel.}

#7. At the Lord Jesus Christ’s coming to Israel – the nation of Israel was obligated to "believe" the Son of God and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID – ORALLY, and the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which Israel refused to do, but instead REJECTED Him and had Him KILLED!}

#7a. At the Holy Spirit’s coming to Israel (at Pentecost) – the nation of Israel was obligated to "believe" the Apostles and Disciples (within whom the Holy Spirit dwelled) and obey them (i.e. WHAT THEY SAID – ORALLY, and the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {Which Israel refused to do, but instead REJECTED them (and the Holy Spirit living in them) and eventually started KILLING them – i.e. Stephen, James, etc.}

Upon the nation of Israel’s REJECTION of the entire Godhead, God turned to the Gentiles.

#7b. Under the “New Covenant" - Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ {all His "seed" – BOTH Jew & Gentile} are to "believe" God, and His Holy Apostles, and obey Him (i.e. WHAT HE SAID in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH). {We are to simply BELIEVE the “Gospel” of the Grace of God (i.e. Paul’s “Gospel”) and “obey” God by receiving the Lord Jesus Christ as our personal Saviour – PLUS NOTHING!}

#8. In the Great Tribulation - Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are to "believe" God and obey Him. (i.e. WHAT HE SAID in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH and WHAT He; and the two witnesses; and the 144,000 ORALLY SPEAK.) {And they had better "overcome" and "endure to THE END"}

#9. In the Millennial Reign of Christ - People BETTER "believe" God and obey Him. (There will be no "faith" involved.) {The Lord Jesus Christ will RULE WITH A ROD OF IRON - There will be NO HUMANISTIC (Psychiatry/Psychology) EXCUSES THEN!}

#10. In Eternity – Everything will be “settled” and all will be well:

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Revelation 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.

Now I do not say that what I have presented can be called “Dispensations” and I am not trying to “set up” some “NEW SYSTEM”. What I have tried to do is understand HOW God has dealt with men in the past, and WHY He hasn’t always dealt with them in the same manner {although He has ALWAYS REQUIRED – “BELIEF” (in His “words”) and Obedience}.

I have found that the different “COVENANTS” that God made with men at different times in the history of mankind - best explain the “differences” in the way that God has dealt with men.

Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

[chette777]

George,

Can you explain the difference between the New Covenant found only 4 times in the Bible once in the OT and thrice in Hebrews only. And "New Testament" found only in the NT three times in the Gospel books and twice in Paul's writings and once in Hebrews.

What is the difference between a covenant and a testament? Newer translations change new testament to new covenant.

Great Study on Biblical dispensations

[Jassy]

Originally Posted by chette777

George,

Can you explain the difference between the New Covenant found only 4 times in the Bible once in the OT and thrice in Hebrews only. And "New Testament" found only in the NT three times in the Gospel books and twice in Paul's writings and once in Hebrews.

What is the difference between a covenant and a testament? Newer translations change new testament to new covenant.

Great Study on Biblical dispensations

Brother Chette,

I noticed your question to brother George. I hope I am not interrupting here, but regarding these differences between New Covenant and New Testament, there is something that I have noticed.

KJV: Matthew 26:28 - "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

Now if you look at this same scripture, in the corrupt New International Version (NIV), it reads: "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

The NIV leaves out "new testament." The NIV doesn't even call it a new covenant.

Covenant means "an agreement between two or more parties." Testament means "a will to go into force after death." Jesus died on the cross of Calvary for our sins. So it is a testament, going into force AFTER His death!

I hope this brief post is helpful. (And maybe brother George will be correcting me; I am always open to learning the truth.)

Jassy