As for covenants, and one of them being the law, I guess I just don't see there being only two.
And the questions in your last paragraph are rather mixed up (and far less than clear.) Do I see myself as Abraham's seed? Yes. But evidently not in the same sense that you might think of it.
Whether you see 2 or lots of individual ones really isn't so much the point. God says things in so many ways, and the repeats, I think, are just so those who seek Him will always find something that they grasp. Much like all the different forms of Dispensations and Covenant theology.. I don't think any of them or any of us have a corner on understanding the depth of God's plan. But I think we can all agree, God has a plan yes?
To me, it's just sad that many think God has different plans that cause division in the end. The us vs them mentality. The church is divided. Jews are divided. God's people are divided. Not because of God, but because we put doctrine where it doesn't belong. God gave it to guide us to Him and to Christ. Not to divide ourselves. We have all been called to function as priests, all been called to serve(minister). The covenants are God's promises we can depend upon. Christ being one of them, the law the other. To squabble over whether that includes God's covenant given to Abraham, to Adam, to David, to Noah, to Jacob, to Moses, makes little difference to me.
And you say you see yourself as Abraham's seed in a different sense, would you care to elaborate?
Here's another perspective to consider. Could the covenant and the law be 2 separate things? The law being just one aspect of the covenant?
The word law is such a diverse topic, used in so many different contexts, that no doubt it at times is just one aspect of a covenant.
But I think that it is just too big a topic to add to this discussion that I don't believe would help.. But maybe you're thinking it does? Maybe help guide us a bit into your thinking?
Maybe it's just me but it sure seems like Hebrews is talking about the soon end(at the time Hebrews was written) of the earthly temple system that occurred in 70AD. Hebrews 8:13 in this context then makes perfect sense: what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready(Gr. "engys" near,soon) to vanish away.
While there are lots of passages throughout the scriptures that point to a "soon", "at hand", "little while" aspect to the "end times", and I realize those taking them literally from the perspective of a timeline of all history can see it as either failed prophecies or the different "preterist" views. I don't think they "must" be understood that way alone.
Much like many prophecies throughout, they had a literal "current" understanding and a future understanding. Call them physical vs spiritual, or whatever depending on the prophecy. But even Haggai 2 talks about the end coming in a short time. Yet that was at least 500 years before the 70AD destruction of the 2nd temple. Half a millennium doesn't sound like a "little while" to me, but in God's perspective, 1 day is as a thousand, yes? I tend to see most of these are they are coming shortly in the perspective of my life's timeline.. Which if we live to 100, that makes it much sooner than 500 years! Very soon. At hand. And well, the end is coming!
The word law is such a diverse topic, used in so many different contexts, that no doubt it at times is just one aspect of a covenant.
But I think that it is just too big a topic to add to this discussion that I don't believe would help.. But maybe you're thinking it does? Maybe help guide us a bit into your thinking?
The discussion was about Hebrews 8 and the 2 covenants...the new covenant in Christ being far superior. Then in the next chapter it says: " Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary". The point I was trying to make is that certain aspects of the law are certainly still in effect such as the ten commandments, but God isn't requiring anybody (Jew or Gentile) to sacrifice animals on an altar anymore. That is the aspect of the Law( old covenant) I think Hebrews is talking about..the earthly temple in Jerusalem and the system that supported it. Why does Hebrews mention the temple and the high priests and the temple procedures and then contrasts that with Christ being the high priest and going through agreater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands? Maybe it's just me but I think the big message of Hebrews is "an earthly temple built with hands is not needed anymore and is about to disappear"... in other words 70AD.
While there are lots of passages throughout the scriptures that point to a "soon", "at hand", "little while" aspect to the "end times", and I realize those taking them literally from the perspective of a timeline of all history can see it as either failed prophecies or the different "preterist" views. I don't think they "must" be understood that way alone.
Much like many prophecies throughout, they had a literal "current" understanding and a future understanding. Call them physical vs spiritual, or whatever depending on the prophecy. But even Haggai 2 talks about the end coming in a short time. Yet that was at least 500 years before the 70AD destruction of the 2nd temple. Half a millennium doesn't sound like a "little while" to me, but in God's perspective, 1 day is as a thousand, yes? I tend to see most of these are they are coming shortly in the perspective of my life's timeline.. Which if we live to 100, that makes it much sooner than 500 years! Very soon. At hand. And well, the end is coming!
The time references will forever be debated by futurists and preterists. I guess we will have to agree to disagree, but I didn't become a partial preterist on the time statements alone. Certain parallels between old and new testament verses clarified some questions I had when I was a dispensationalist.
In Daniel 12, Daniel is given a specific revelation about his people Israel. In the vision one "person" asked the man in linen " “How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled? " The reply was " It will be for a time, times and half a time.[b] When the powerof the holy people(Israel) has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.” Then Daniel asks: “My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?” The reply was: “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end.
So we can deduce from the text that at the time of the "end" the power of Daniel's people Israel will be "broken" and Daniel is told that the prophecy will not occur in his lifetime because of the figurative phrase "words are rolled up and sealed". It says Daniel will rest(physically die) then be resurrected at the end of the 1335 days to receive his spiritual inheritance. The countdown of the 1335 days is triggered when the daily sacrifice is abolished and abomination of desolation is set up. It is not clear if both events happen at the same time or the countdown is between the 2 events. If you look at recorded history of Israel known as Judea at that time, the daily sacrifice offered in the temple in Jerusalem was stopped on 3 separate occasions during the Zealot rebellion from 66-70 AD. The 1st sacrifice on behalf of the Roman emperor was stopped in August of 66AD by the Zealots, then it was briefly stopped during the temple siege by the Zealots in 68AD, then it was stopped completely by the Roman army in 70AD. I don't know which of the abolished temple sacrifices we should start the countdown from but I suspect that the "end of days" Daniel was told would happen happened between 70 & 74 AD. And the power of Israel was broken in 70AD. I don't believe that this is a future Israel. The historical record is just too close to the biblical account.
A parallel to Daniel 12:9 is Revelation 22:10: Then he told me, "Do notseal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near. This is not just a time statement but John is told not to seal the words of the prophecy because the events were to occur at least in his lifetime. I don't believe a case can be made that it's just a window of time that could be thousands of years in length or the same phrase that was used in Daniel would not have been used in Revelation.
The overall flavor I get as I am reading a lot of these sources, like the two above, is that there is somewhat of an expectation that theology "develops" like other fields we are exposed to like philosophy, mathematics, electrical engineering, computer science. There are "fathers" of say psychology like Sigmund Freud, BF Skinner, who developed significant ideas in their fields that become the foundation of the field for further learning.
The overall question it is starting to leave me with is when we are talking about theology and man's faith, is this something man originated or something God originated? If it is something man originated, then it makes sense to track it as other fields we have. Thoughts can develop over time, become tested with the scientific method, proven, and widely accepted. They can help people over time.
However, if "theology" is something God originated, then the effort to continue constructing man's thought is nothing more than a modern tower of Babel.
I guess it's kind of weird, because we talk about the same thing from two different angles - "faith" in a way to indicate that it's a belief not a mental construct, and "theology" indicating man's systemic study of God which is 100% mental constructs.
So, which one is it folks in your opinion?
After pondering that for a bit, neither appears to adequately capture my particular taste... but, that's probably no surprise.
However, I do think that "knowledge" continues to (and certainly has) increase(d.) Of course, there's caveats to not seeing that for what that actually means, so I'll try to explain some of my thoughts on this further.
For starters, I don't equate that with men being more intelligent now than they were 2 or 3 thousand years ago. If anything, I'm of the persuasion that, mankind in general is less intelligent now than then - even though much greater knowledge exists now. But that raises a few questions. How can that be, how did that happen, and why is that? And t's not as though I'm convinced that information overload necessarily "dulls" the brain (though it might.) Looking back at the lifestyle of mankind over hundreds (and thousands) of years, there has been relatively little change up until about the last 140 years or so. Then, technology started transforming the world... on a rapidly accelerating pace. How or why did this happen? Did men all of sudden get smarter than any and all previous generations?
I don't doubt than man would like to take credit for it. However, my view of it is that God "kept a lid on it" until it was time. The reason I think that? Straight from Dan. 12:4.
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Interestingly enough, it doesn't appear to restrict what kind of knowledge shall be increased... and I see no reason not to think that it would also include knowledge of the truth. Furthermore, Hebrews rather plainly states (in the opening lines) that God has revealed Himself in various ways at various times over the years. Do you think He reached a point where He said, Enough... no more for man?
I'm not even sure how to put into words some of the rest of my thoughts on this. Adam decides what his senses reveal to him is "real" and screws the pooch for the rest of us. We don't get a choice, as that then becomes the (only) reality man knows. Problem is, it's temporal. Nevertheless, man is ensnared by it (i.e., his senses.) He needs to be rescued. Rescued from the entrapment to his senses... by something/anything that is received and known by his senses? What a conundrum!
Yet, little by little... over time... the "bits and pieces" of this unknown and unseen "spiritual reality" are laid out before us. BUT... man's intelligence is waning. His ability to put the pieces together and "figure it out" is falling down. Apparently he needs "more and more" pieces of the puzzle. Looking back at the first advent of Jesus Christ, it would seem that the scribes and Pharisees must have been as dumb as dirt not to know that it was "time" for the promised Messiah to arrive. It had all been foretold and prophesied, right down to the exact year. On top of that, more signs, miracles and wonders than had ever been seen before. Still, it wasn't enough.
No wonder God "went another direction" with the apostle Paul. Set aside what your senses tell you? Can you believe that God raised Jesus Christ from the dead? Impossible. Yes, that's all that the senses mind will (or can) ever tell you. But, if you (have reason to, and can) step away from the reality of the world (and the life that you have in it) far enough to actually believe the impossible (that he lives)... there is something "more real" than what you are accustomed to thinking is real that lights up. A new way to see things becomes possible.
Virtual reality... it's a "new age" phenomenon. Who or what determines what is "real" for each of us? Our minds. And wow... are things ever changing fast now. Knowledge is exploding upwards. Or, should I say, downward? (Because we all look down at our phones, right?) Or maybe it's, knowledge upwards, intelligence downwards.
Think God is a step behind in keeping up with the rapidly depleting computing power of the mind, and its ability to figure out what is "real"?
yeah, mmmm... seems I think not. But, attribute it to whomever (or whatever) you want.
Eusebius did not see the prophecies in Daniel, Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 as modern dispensationalists do. Eusebius believed that those prophecies were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. The events in the Book of Revelation he did view as future from his perspective. He didn't connect the book of Revelation with the other prophecies like modern dispensationalists tend to do.
The discussion was about Hebrews 8 and the 2 covenants...the new covenant in Christ being far superior. Then in the next chapter it says: " Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary". The point I was trying to make is that certain aspects of the law are certainly still in effect such as the ten commandments, but God isn't requiring anybody (Jew or Gentile) to sacrifice animals on an altar anymore. That is the aspect of the Law( old covenant) I think Hebrews is talking about..the earthly temple in Jerusalem and the system that supported it. Why does Hebrews mention the temple and the high priests and the temple procedures and then contrasts that with Christ being the high priest and going through agreater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands? Maybe it's just me but I think the big message of Hebrews is "an earthly temple built with hands is not needed anymore and is about to disappear"... in other words 70AD.
I think I am understanding a bit where you're coming from. But I tend to disagree.. You say that "certain aspects of the law are certainly still in effect" and mention the ten commandments.. But others are not... How does one decide what isn't in effect and which is? Just because the physical temple is rubble at the moment, and Jews refuse to offer sacrifices until it is rebuilt (which I think it will), what actually says the laws requiring them are not in in effect while the "other" laws are? And which ten commandments? You know the list of commandments in the scriptures where it uses the label "ten commandments" (Deut 34) is wholly different than the usual one Christians list.
The time references will forever be debated by futurists and preterists. I guess we will have to agree to disagree, but I didn't become a partial preterist on the time statements alone. Certain parallels between old and new testament verses clarified some questions I had when I was a dispensationalist.
In Daniel 12, Daniel is given a specific revelation about his people Israel. In the vision one "person" asked the man in linen " “How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled? " The reply was " It will be for a time, times and half a time.[b] When the powerof the holy people(Israel) has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.” Then Daniel asks: “My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?” The reply was: “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end.
So we can deduce from the text that at the time of the "end" the power of Daniel's people Israel will be "broken" and Daniel is told that the prophecy will not occur in his lifetime because of the figurative phrase "words are rolled up and sealed". It says Daniel will rest(physically die) then be resurrected at the end of the 1335 days to receive his spiritual inheritance. The countdown of the 1335 days is triggered when the daily sacrifice is abolished and abomination of desolation is set up. It is not clear if both events happen at the same time or the countdown is between the 2 events. If you look at recorded history of Israel known as Judea at that time, the daily sacrifice offered in the temple in Jerusalem was stopped on 3 separate occasions during the Zealot rebellion from 66-70 AD. The 1st sacrifice on behalf of the Roman emperor was stopped in August of 66AD by the Zealots, then it was briefly stopped during the temple siege by the Zealots in 68AD, then it was stopped completely by the Roman army in 70AD. I don't know which of the abolished temple sacrifices we should start the countdown from but I suspect that the "end of days" Daniel was told would happen happened between 70 & 74 AD. And the power of Israel was broken in 70AD. I don't believe that this is a future Israel. The historical record is just too close to the biblical account.
A parallel to Daniel 12:9 is Revelation 22:10: Then he told me, "Do notseal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near. This is not just a time statement but John is told not to seal the words of the prophecy because the events were to occur at least in his lifetime. I don't believe a case can be made that it's just a window of time that could be thousands of years in length or the same phrase that was used in Daniel would not have been used in Revelation.
I'm glad to see you added the prefix "partial" to preterist... As full preterism make no sense to me, so I won't bother you with those questions, since you don't believe it either.. And I can't say I'm a full futurist either... Eschatology as whole is not something I place much thought or diligence into figuring out.
When seed is planted, it dies. I take it you have never farmed, or gardened, or for that matter... know an awful lot about agriculture in general.
I've made no boasts or claims of my agricultural knowledge. In fact, in all categories of life, I consider myself unknowledgeable, with "novice" being an overstated title.
And yes, John 12:24 does state rather plainly "that a seed dies", only the death of seed wasn't questioned, it was your emphasis on "not remaining".. Since in your words the "seed does not remain", and the "seed" is Christ. Thus my question, so according to you does Christ not remain? Or is Christ not the seed of Abraham?
You disagree that we have all been called to function as priests.. Would it be because you have a different view of what a priest is? Or because the definition doesn't seem to fit those called of God? And to help clarify, the word priest (kohen in Hebrew) is rooted in the meaning of one who stands sure, as a support for others. Long before Christ, the Roman kings were given the honorific title of the great priest, not solely because they were over all "religious" priests but also because they stood and gave support for the people they ruled. Would you not say that we are called to give support and help to one another? To at times provide surety to those in need?
After pondering that for a bit, neither appears to adequately capture my particular taste... but, that's probably no surprise.
However, I do think that "knowledge" continues to (and certainly has) increase(d.) Of course, there's caveats to not seeing that for what that actually means, so I'll try to explain some of my thoughts on this further.
For starters, I don't equate that with men being more intelligent now than they were 2 or 3 thousand years ago. If anything, I'm of the persuasion that, mankind in general is less intelligent now than then - even though much greater knowledge exists now. But that raises a few questions. How can that be, how did that happen, and why is that? And t's not as though I'm convinced that information overload necessarily "dulls" the brain (though it might.) Looking back at the lifestyle of mankind over hundreds (and thousands) of years, there has been relatively little change up until about the last 140 years or so. Then, technology started transforming the world... on a rapidly accelerating pace. How or why did this happen? Did men all of sudden get smarter than any and all previous generations?
I don't doubt than man would like to take credit for it. However, my view of it is that God "kept a lid on it" until it was time. The reason I think that? Straight from Dan. 12:4.
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Interestingly enough, it doesn't appear to restrict what kind of knowledge shall be increased... and I see no reason not to think that it would also include knowledge of the truth. Furthermore, Hebrews rather plainly states (in the opening lines) that God has revealed Himself in various ways at various times over the years. Do you think He reached a point where He said, Enough... no more for man?
I'm not even sure how to put into words some of the rest of my thoughts on this. Adam decides what his senses reveal to him is "real" and screws the pooch for the rest of us. We don't get a choice, as that then becomes the (only) reality man knows. Problem is, it's temporal. Nevertheless, man is ensnared by it (i.e., his senses.) He needs to be rescued. Rescued from the entrapment to his senses... by something/anything that is received and known by his senses? What a conundrum!
Yet, little by little... over time... the "bits and pieces" of this unknown and unseen "spiritual reality" are laid out before us. BUT... man's intelligence is waning. His ability to put the pieces together and "figure it out" is falling down. Apparently he needs "more and more" pieces of the puzzle. Looking back at the first advent of Jesus Christ, it would seem that the scribes and Pharisees must have been as dumb as dirt not to know that it was "time" for the promised Messiah to arrive. It had all been foretold and prophesied, right down to the exact year. On top of that, more signs, miracles and wonders than had ever been seen before. Still, it wasn't enough.
No wonder God "went another direction" with the apostle Paul. Set aside what your senses tell you? Can you believe that God raised Jesus Christ from the dead? Impossible. Yes, that's all that the senses mind will (or can) ever tell you. But, if you (have reason to, and can) step away from the reality of the world (and the life that you have in it) far enough to actually believe the impossible (that he lives)... there is something "more real" than what you are accustomed to thinking is real that lights up. A new way to see things becomes possible.
Virtual reality... it's a "new age" phenomenon. Who or what determines what is "real" for each of us? Our minds. And wow... are things ever changing fast now. Knowledge is exploding upwards. Or, should I say, downward? (Because we all look down at our phones, right?) Or maybe it's, knowledge upwards, intelligence downwards.
Think God is a step behind in keeping up with the rapidly depleting computing power of the mind, and its ability to figure out what is "real"?
yeah, mmmm... seems I think not. But, attribute it to whomever (or whatever) you want.
Interesting stuff in this post. To sum up how it sounds:
It sounds like a degradation of the bloodline, including man's intelligence can be traced through history. But God is accomodating by filling in more and more pieces of truth. (My mind goes to a wheel of fortune puzzle where different letters are revealed each spin).
I guess I would differ from this viewpoint in that I carry a good deal more optimism for mankind and the future. I have kids so maybe I want to envision a world where they do well. I see in every field - say sports for example, performance times getting better and better over the decades. Olympic records in events are continually broken, not falling shorter and shorter of the previous decade's records. Technology is one area that it is most evident. Man does some experiment with a type of melted sand, and that leads to cellular phones. I look at the mental health field. As hard as it is to make a science out of human behavior because humans are unpredictable in many ways, we are no longer treating patients with lobotomies or electric shock therapy. Now maybe those last 2 are humans becoming stupider for a century and the Egyptians treated it better, but in general I seem to notice advancement, not retreat in fields.
I've made no boasts or claims of my agricultural knowledge. In fact, in all categories of life, I consider myself unknowledgeable, with "novice" being an overstated title.
And yes, John 12:24 does state rather plainly "that a seed dies", only the death of seed wasn't questioned, it was your emphasis on "not remaining".. Since in your words the "seed does not remain", and the "seed" is Christ. Thus my question, so according to you does Christ not remain? Or is Christ not the seed of Abraham?
Might I suggest a simple experiment for you? Take a bean seed (which are all nice and big, nearly any kind will do) and plant it in a small pot or cup of dirt. Water it and keep the soil relatively moist for 3 or 4 weeks. Presumably, it will germinate and a little bean plant will have risen up out of the dirt. Okay, now go ahead and dig up the dirt around it and see if that bean seed is still there somewhere.
Let's try looking at this from another angle. Do you see or think of yourself as your father's seed? Surely each of us were, and in a certain sense one might even say of themselves, "I am my father's seed." Is that literally true now? Do you see of think of yourself as a wee little sperm, with a wiggly tail? Of course not.
Maybe you get the point. Or, maybe not. You tell me. But as I see it, seed is seed. It dies. It becomes something new. And when it does, it's no longer actually seen or thought of as "seed," except in a historical (or history looking forward) sense.
I guess I would differ from this viewpoint in that I carry a good deal more optimism for mankind and the future. I have kids so maybe I want to envision a world where they do well. I see in every field - say sports for example, performance times getting better and better over the decades.
Okay, you have kids. So do I (but maybe older than yours.) Do you know how many younger folks (in sales, mind you) can't make change in their heads if you hand them a 20? They've become so reliant on a machine telling them the answer, they don't bother even trying to figure it out. And, just about like a muscle in the body, when nerve cells (perhaps I should say, neural pathways) in the brain aren't used (repeatedly), they can atrophy. Matter of fact, there have been experiments done (on animals, of course) that have shown if one eye is covered up at an early developmental stage in life, the brain becomes "wired" to operate with the one eye, and the effect (or damage, really) is irreversible. The animal(s) ended up being permanently blind in the eye that was covered. (However, this did not have the same effect in adult animals, even when the eye was covered for longer periods of time.)
For sure knowledge has, and will continue to increase. (I thought that was rather clear in my previous post.) And I don't disagree that this increase in knowledge will offer tremendous benefits to mankind and the future. Computers (and cell phones, which have greater and greater computing power every year) are fueling this tremendous explosion in knowledge, and capabilities of both the individual, and society as a whole. The amount of information (i.e., knowledge) nearly instantly available at our fingertips has become astronomical. And there is little doubt that it is putting more and more power into the hands of fewer and fewer people. But the point is... who or what will all these advancements and benefits be attributed to? (And just how "intelligent" or smart it that, really?) Yeah, it's a sign of the times alright, make no mistake about it.
Taxi, "Dispensationalism" is the theology of a certain viewpoint of eschatology.
is Dispensationalism only about eschatology? I am just asking about the definition of Dispensationalism. I thought it was about dividing the whole bible into different time periods, not just the end times. So if I believe there is different "dispensation" between the law and the gospels, and a different "dispensation" between the gospels and the day of Pentecost till today, but don't believe the rapture is before the tribulation, should I still consider myself a Dispensationalist?
is Dispensationalism only about eschatology? I am just asking about the definition of Dispensationalism. I thought it was about dividing the whole bible into different time periods, not just the end times. So if I believe there is different "dispensation" between the law and the gospels, and a different "dispensation" between the gospels and the day of Pentecost till today, but don't believe the rapture is before the tribulation, should I still consider myself a Dispensationalist?
You are correct. It's about diving the Bible into time periods, with different rules for different time periods. In Time Period A, Ruleset A applies, and in Time Period B, Ruleset A no longer applies but Ruleset B applies. And so on. That's independent on your beliefs about anything that happens IN them, or even which ones apply. Bullinger and wierwille both promoted them, but gave different lists. They vary widely depending on who you ask.
Everyone here has a point of view and an opinion. Sometimes that leads to accidental errors of fact in a post (we're only human), and sometimes it leads to what's believed to be the truth despite not being factually correct (hey, we're only human.) So, yes, it's good to check.
is Dispensationalism only about eschatology? I am just asking about the definition of Dispensationalism. I thought it was about dividing the whole bible into different time periods, not just the end times. So if I believe there is different "dispensation" between the law and the gospels, and a different "dispensation" between the gospels and the day of Pentecost till today, but don't believe the rapture is before the tribulation, should I still consider myself a Dispensationalist?
Okay, you have kids. So do I (but maybe older than yours.) Do you know how many younger folks (in sales, mind you) can't make change in their heads if you hand them a 20? They've become so reliant on a machine telling them the answer, they don't bother even trying to figure it out. And, just about like a muscle in the body, when nerve cells (perhaps I should say, neural pathways) in the brain aren't used (repeatedly), they can atrophy. Matter of fact, there have been experiments done (on animals, of course) that have shown if one eye is covered up at an early developmental stage in life, the brain becomes "wired" to operate with the one eye, and the effect (or damage, really) is irreversible. The animal(s) ended up being permanently blind in the eye that was covered. (However, this did not have the same effect in adult animals, even when the eye was covered for longer periods of time.)
For sure knowledge has, and will continue to increase. (I thought that was rather clear in my previous post.) And I don't disagree that this increase in knowledge will offer tremendous benefits to mankind and the future. Computers (and cell phones, which have greater and greater computing power every year) are fueling this tremendous explosion in knowledge, and capabilities of both the individual, and society as a whole. The amount of information (i.e., knowledge) nearly instantly available at our fingertips has become astronomical. And there is little doubt that it is putting more and more power into the hands of fewer and fewer people. But the point is... who or what will all these advancements and benefits be attributed to? (And just how "intelligent" or smart it that, really?) Yeah, it's a sign of the times alright, make no mistake about it.
I would blame your observations of the younger generation's inability to make change on the poor quality of math education in our country as a start. Yes the face glued to the small square is an evidence of the times, and does have an impact. But my grandfather said the same thing about kids who grew up with calculators not using a slide rule.
In my observations, there is a cycle. First technology develops. Then sometime down the road after that, the ethics and practices to deal with that technology develop. I mean, discover nuclear physics, an atomic bomb is dropped, make the government private communication networks public to become the internet, the first business model that develops is internet porn. It seems that mankind goes through a series of fails after technology disrupts their dominion over their world before coming to any form of success on the ethical, moral, and yes intelligence front.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
18
21
18
54
Popular Days
Jul 15
20
Jul 2
20
Jul 11
20
Jul 5
15
Top Posters In This Topic
WordWolf 18 posts
chockfull 21 posts
Infoabsorption 18 posts
TLC 54 posts
Popular Days
Jul 15 2018
20 posts
Jul 2 2018
20 posts
Jul 11 2018
20 posts
Jul 5 2018
15 posts
Popular Posts
DontWorryBeHappy
Dispensationalism is a man-made, private interpretation of “ALL scripture”, DEAD doctrine, based upon early 19th century textual and critical evidence which relied completely upon the latest 16th cent
DontWorryBeHappy
Hi Taxidev! imho, the entire “Biblical” and doctrinal underpinning Of TWIt’s private interpretation is based on the FALSE PREMISE (logical fallacy) Of dispensationalism. This was actually a world
chockfull
So on the education dig I know that's pointed towards someone on this thread, but I think criticizing any of us on our education background is a bit obnoxious. I mean my theological education was 4
TrustAndObey
Whether you see 2 or lots of individual ones really isn't so much the point. God says things in so many ways, and the repeats, I think, are just so those who seek Him will always find something that they grasp. Much like all the different forms of Dispensations and Covenant theology.. I don't think any of them or any of us have a corner on understanding the depth of God's plan. But I think we can all agree, God has a plan yes?
To me, it's just sad that many think God has different plans that cause division in the end. The us vs them mentality. The church is divided. Jews are divided. God's people are divided. Not because of God, but because we put doctrine where it doesn't belong. God gave it to guide us to Him and to Christ. Not to divide ourselves. We have all been called to function as priests, all been called to serve(minister). The covenants are God's promises we can depend upon. Christ being one of them, the law the other. To squabble over whether that includes God's covenant given to Abraham, to Adam, to David, to Noah, to Jacob, to Moses, makes little difference to me.
And you say you see yourself as Abraham's seed in a different sense, would you care to elaborate?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
The word law is such a diverse topic, used in so many different contexts, that no doubt it at times is just one aspect of a covenant.
But I think that it is just too big a topic to add to this discussion that I don't believe would help.. But maybe you're thinking it does? Maybe help guide us a bit into your thinking?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
While there are lots of passages throughout the scriptures that point to a "soon", "at hand", "little while" aspect to the "end times", and I realize those taking them literally from the perspective of a timeline of all history can see it as either failed prophecies or the different "preterist" views. I don't think they "must" be understood that way alone.
Much like many prophecies throughout, they had a literal "current" understanding and a future understanding. Call them physical vs spiritual, or whatever depending on the prophecy. But even Haggai 2 talks about the end coming in a short time. Yet that was at least 500 years before the 70AD destruction of the 2nd temple. Half a millennium doesn't sound like a "little while" to me, but in God's perspective, 1 day is as a thousand, yes? I tend to see most of these are they are coming shortly in the perspective of my life's timeline.. Which if we live to 100, that makes it much sooner than 500 years! Very soon. At hand. And well, the end is coming!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Infoabsorption
The discussion was about Hebrews 8 and the 2 covenants...the new covenant in Christ being far superior. Then in the next chapter it says: " Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary". The point I was trying to make is that certain aspects of the law are certainly still in effect such as the ten commandments, but God isn't requiring anybody (Jew or Gentile) to sacrifice animals on an altar anymore. That is the aspect of the Law( old covenant) I think Hebrews is talking about..the earthly temple in Jerusalem and the system that supported it. Why does Hebrews mention the temple and the high priests and the temple procedures and then contrasts that with Christ being the high priest and going through a greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands? Maybe it's just me but I think the big message of Hebrews is "an earthly temple built with hands is not needed anymore and is about to disappear"... in other words 70AD.
Edited by InfoabsorptionLink to comment
Share on other sites
Infoabsorption
The time references will forever be debated by futurists and preterists. I guess we will have to agree to disagree, but I didn't become a partial preterist on the time statements alone. Certain parallels between old and new testament verses clarified some questions I had when I was a dispensationalist.
In Daniel 12, Daniel is given a specific revelation about his people Israel. In the vision one "person" asked the man in linen " “How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled? " The reply was " It will be for a time, times and half a time.[b] When the power of the holy people(Israel) has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.” Then Daniel asks: “My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?” The reply was: “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end.
So we can deduce from the text that at the time of the "end" the power of Daniel's people Israel will be "broken" and Daniel is told that the prophecy will not occur in his lifetime because of the figurative phrase "words are rolled up and sealed". It says Daniel will rest(physically die) then be resurrected at the end of the 1335 days to receive his spiritual inheritance. The countdown of the 1335 days is triggered when the daily sacrifice is abolished and abomination of desolation is set up. It is not clear if both events happen at the same time or the countdown is between the 2 events. If you look at recorded history of Israel known as Judea at that time, the daily sacrifice offered in the temple in Jerusalem was stopped on 3 separate occasions during the Zealot rebellion from 66-70 AD. The 1st sacrifice on behalf of the Roman emperor was stopped in August of 66AD by the Zealots, then it was briefly stopped during the temple siege by the Zealots in 68AD, then it was stopped completely by the Roman army in 70AD. I don't know which of the abolished temple sacrifices we should start the countdown from but I suspect that the "end of days" Daniel was told would happen happened between 70 & 74 AD. And the power of Israel was broken in 70AD. I don't believe that this is a future Israel. The historical record is just too close to the biblical account.
A parallel to Daniel 12:9 is Revelation 22:10: Then he told me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near. This is not just a time statement but John is told not to seal the words of the prophecy because the events were to occur at least in his lifetime. I don't believe a case can be made that it's just a window of time that could be thousands of years in length or the same phrase that was used in Daniel would not have been used in Revelation.
Edited by Infoabsorptiongoof
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
After pondering that for a bit, neither appears to adequately capture my particular taste... but, that's probably no surprise.
However, I do think that "knowledge" continues to (and certainly has) increase(d.) Of course, there's caveats to not seeing that for what that actually means, so I'll try to explain some of my thoughts on this further.
For starters, I don't equate that with men being more intelligent now than they were 2 or 3 thousand years ago. If anything, I'm of the persuasion that, mankind in general is less intelligent now than then - even though much greater knowledge exists now. But that raises a few questions. How can that be, how did that happen, and why is that? And t's not as though I'm convinced that information overload necessarily "dulls" the brain (though it might.) Looking back at the lifestyle of mankind over hundreds (and thousands) of years, there has been relatively little change up until about the last 140 years or so. Then, technology started transforming the world... on a rapidly accelerating pace. How or why did this happen? Did men all of sudden get smarter than any and all previous generations?
I don't doubt than man would like to take credit for it. However, my view of it is that God "kept a lid on it" until it was time. The reason I think that? Straight from Dan. 12:4.
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Interestingly enough, it doesn't appear to restrict what kind of knowledge shall be increased... and I see no reason not to think that it would also include knowledge of the truth. Furthermore, Hebrews rather plainly states (in the opening lines) that God has revealed Himself in various ways at various times over the years. Do you think He reached a point where He said, Enough... no more for man?
I'm not even sure how to put into words some of the rest of my thoughts on this. Adam decides what his senses reveal to him is "real" and screws the pooch for the rest of us. We don't get a choice, as that then becomes the (only) reality man knows. Problem is, it's temporal. Nevertheless, man is ensnared by it (i.e., his senses.) He needs to be rescued. Rescued from the entrapment to his senses... by something/anything that is received and known by his senses? What a conundrum!
Yet, little by little... over time... the "bits and pieces" of this unknown and unseen "spiritual reality" are laid out before us. BUT... man's intelligence is waning. His ability to put the pieces together and "figure it out" is falling down. Apparently he needs "more and more" pieces of the puzzle. Looking back at the first advent of Jesus Christ, it would seem that the scribes and Pharisees must have been as dumb as dirt not to know that it was "time" for the promised Messiah to arrive. It had all been foretold and prophesied, right down to the exact year. On top of that, more signs, miracles and wonders than had ever been seen before. Still, it wasn't enough.
No wonder God "went another direction" with the apostle Paul. Set aside what your senses tell you? Can you believe that God raised Jesus Christ from the dead? Impossible. Yes, that's all that the senses mind will (or can) ever tell you. But, if you (have reason to, and can) step away from the reality of the world (and the life that you have in it) far enough to actually believe the impossible (that he lives)... there is something "more real" than what you are accustomed to thinking is real that lights up. A new way to see things becomes possible.
Virtual reality... it's a "new age" phenomenon. Who or what determines what is "real" for each of us? Our minds. And wow... are things ever changing fast now. Knowledge is exploding upwards. Or, should I say, downward? (Because we all look down at our phones, right?) Or maybe it's, knowledge upwards, intelligence downwards.
Think God is a step behind in keeping up with the rapidly depleting computing power of the mind, and its ability to figure out what is "real"?
yeah, mmmm... seems I think not. But, attribute it to whomever (or whatever) you want.
Edited by TLCLink to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
I disagree with it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Infoabsorption
But the commentary you posted used Eusebius as an example of an early church father who shared the views of modern dispensationalists.
Edited by InfoabsorptionLink to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
When seed is planted, it dies. I take it you have never farmed, or gardened, or for that matter... know an awful lot about agriculture in general.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
says who? I disagree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
not really. it's half a dozen ways out of synch with where the conversation is at.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
so what?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Infoabsorption
Because it's NOT true!
Eusebius did not see the prophecies in Daniel, Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 as modern dispensationalists do. Eusebius believed that those prophecies were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. The events in the Book of Revelation he did view as future from his perspective. He didn't connect the book of Revelation with the other prophecies like modern dispensationalists tend to do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
I think I am understanding a bit where you're coming from. But I tend to disagree.. You say that "certain aspects of the law are certainly still in effect" and mention the ten commandments.. But others are not... How does one decide what isn't in effect and which is? Just because the physical temple is rubble at the moment, and Jews refuse to offer sacrifices until it is rebuilt (which I think it will), what actually says the laws requiring them are not in in effect while the "other" laws are? And which ten commandments? You know the list of commandments in the scriptures where it uses the label "ten commandments" (Deut 34) is wholly different than the usual one Christians list.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
I'm glad to see you added the prefix "partial" to preterist... As full preterism make no sense to me, so I won't bother you with those questions, since you don't believe it either.. And I can't say I'm a full futurist either... Eschatology as whole is not something I place much thought or diligence into figuring out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
I've made no boasts or claims of my agricultural knowledge. In fact, in all categories of life, I consider myself unknowledgeable, with "novice" being an overstated title.
And yes, John 12:24 does state rather plainly "that a seed dies", only the death of seed wasn't questioned, it was your emphasis on "not remaining".. Since in your words the "seed does not remain", and the "seed" is Christ. Thus my question, so according to you does Christ not remain? Or is Christ not the seed of Abraham?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
You disagree that we have all been called to function as priests.. Would it be because you have a different view of what a priest is? Or because the definition doesn't seem to fit those called of God? And to help clarify, the word priest (kohen in Hebrew) is rooted in the meaning of one who stands sure, as a support for others. Long before Christ, the Roman kings were given the honorific title of the great priest, not solely because they were over all "religious" priests but also because they stood and gave support for the people they ruled. Would you not say that we are called to give support and help to one another? To at times provide surety to those in need?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Interesting stuff in this post. To sum up how it sounds:
It sounds like a degradation of the bloodline, including man's intelligence can be traced through history. But God is accomodating by filling in more and more pieces of truth. (My mind goes to a wheel of fortune puzzle where different letters are revealed each spin).
I guess I would differ from this viewpoint in that I carry a good deal more optimism for mankind and the future. I have kids so maybe I want to envision a world where they do well. I see in every field - say sports for example, performance times getting better and better over the decades. Olympic records in events are continually broken, not falling shorter and shorter of the previous decade's records. Technology is one area that it is most evident. Man does some experiment with a type of melted sand, and that leads to cellular phones. I look at the mental health field. As hard as it is to make a science out of human behavior because humans are unpredictable in many ways, we are no longer treating patients with lobotomies or electric shock therapy. Now maybe those last 2 are humans becoming stupider for a century and the Egyptians treated it better, but in general I seem to notice advancement, not retreat in fields.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
Might I suggest a simple experiment for you? Take a bean seed (which are all nice and big, nearly any kind will do) and plant it in a small pot or cup of dirt. Water it and keep the soil relatively moist for 3 or 4 weeks. Presumably, it will germinate and a little bean plant will have risen up out of the dirt. Okay, now go ahead and dig up the dirt around it and see if that bean seed is still there somewhere.
Let's try looking at this from another angle. Do you see or think of yourself as your father's seed? Surely each of us were, and in a certain sense one might even say of themselves, "I am my father's seed." Is that literally true now? Do you see of think of yourself as a wee little sperm, with a wiggly tail? Of course not.
Maybe you get the point. Or, maybe not. You tell me. But as I see it, seed is seed. It dies. It becomes something new. And when it does, it's no longer actually seen or thought of as "seed," except in a historical (or history looking forward) sense.
Edited by TLCLink to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
Okay, you have kids. So do I (but maybe older than yours.) Do you know how many younger folks (in sales, mind you) can't make change in their heads if you hand them a 20? They've become so reliant on a machine telling them the answer, they don't bother even trying to figure it out. And, just about like a muscle in the body, when nerve cells (perhaps I should say, neural pathways) in the brain aren't used (repeatedly), they can atrophy. Matter of fact, there have been experiments done (on animals, of course) that have shown if one eye is covered up at an early developmental stage in life, the brain becomes "wired" to operate with the one eye, and the effect (or damage, really) is irreversible. The animal(s) ended up being permanently blind in the eye that was covered. (However, this did not have the same effect in adult animals, even when the eye was covered for longer periods of time.)
For sure knowledge has, and will continue to increase. (I thought that was rather clear in my previous post.) And I don't disagree that this increase in knowledge will offer tremendous benefits to mankind and the future. Computers (and cell phones, which have greater and greater computing power every year) are fueling this tremendous explosion in knowledge, and capabilities of both the individual, and society as a whole. The amount of information (i.e., knowledge) nearly instantly available at our fingertips has become astronomical. And there is little doubt that it is putting more and more power into the hands of fewer and fewer people. But the point is... who or what will all these advancements and benefits be attributed to? (And just how "intelligent" or smart it that, really?) Yeah, it's a sign of the times alright, make no mistake about it.
Edited by TLCclarification
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cwb01
is Dispensationalism only about eschatology? I am just asking about the definition of Dispensationalism. I thought it was about dividing the whole bible into different time periods, not just the end times. So if I believe there is different "dispensation" between the law and the gospels, and a different "dispensation" between the gospels and the day of Pentecost till today, but don't believe the rapture is before the tribulation, should I still consider myself a Dispensationalist?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
You are correct. It's about diving the Bible into time periods, with different rules for different time periods. In Time Period A, Ruleset A applies, and in Time Period B, Ruleset A no longer applies but Ruleset B applies. And so on. That's independent on your beliefs about anything that happens IN them, or even which ones apply. Bullinger and wierwille both promoted them, but gave different lists. They vary widely depending on who you ask.
Everyone here has a point of view and an opinion. Sometimes that leads to accidental errors of fact in a post (we're only human), and sometimes it leads to what's believed to be the truth despite not being factually correct (hey, we're only human.) So, yes, it's good to check.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalist_theology
Naturally, you'll want to check if I'm right also. I'm only human. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Infoabsorption
Yes, WordWolf is exactly right. Dispensationalism is about dividing the Bible into time periods, but the focus of modern dispensationalists tends to be on the "end times". Here is just one example why I am no longer a Dispensationalists: http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2072678_2072683_2072696,00.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I would blame your observations of the younger generation's inability to make change on the poor quality of math education in our country as a start. Yes the face glued to the small square is an evidence of the times, and does have an impact. But my grandfather said the same thing about kids who grew up with calculators not using a slide rule.
In my observations, there is a cycle. First technology develops. Then sometime down the road after that, the ethics and practices to deal with that technology develop. I mean, discover nuclear physics, an atomic bomb is dropped, make the government private communication networks public to become the internet, the first business model that develops is internet porn. It seems that mankind goes through a series of fails after technology disrupts their dominion over their world before coming to any form of success on the ethical, moral, and yes intelligence front.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.