The Wonderful Dispensation of Grace

[lightninboy]

So the Apostles were supposed to teach the circumcision gospel to all the Gentiles in the world?

And when was the circumcision gospel phased out and what gospel should a Jew be saved with today?

 

[lightninboy]

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/dispen/baker12.htm

Baker’s Dozen:
A Review of Chapter 65 of A Dispensational Theology concerning its Twelve Points which Allegedly Prove that the Church of Paul’s Epistles is Different from the Church that Existed at Pentecost

1. “There was already a church in existence at Pentecost. The Scripture does not say that the believers at Pentecost were formed into the church. It says they were added to the church (Acts 2:41). A thing must first exist before anything can be added to it” (Baker, A Dispensational Theology, p. 483).

ANSWER: Baker fails to distinguish between two clear-cut groups that are found present on the day of Pentecost. First there was the group that was assembled in Acts 2:1 which was made up of the 120 disciples mentioned in Acts 1:15. It was on these that the Spirit was poured out in such a remarkable way as recorded in Acts 2:2-13. These 120 disciples were the first recipients of the Spirit and thus the first members of the church. The second clear-cut group at Pentecost was the multitude of unsaved Jews out of which about 3000 were saved as the result of Peter’s preaching (Acts 2:41). So it makes good sense to say that the 3000 were added to the saved body of 120 that already existed.

2. “Peter’s preaching at Pentecost proclaimed the fact that Israel’s LAST DAYS had arrived (Acts 2:17), not the FIRST DAYS of the Body of Christ. Israel’s last days does not mean the last days of the existence of the nation of Israel, but those days predicted to usher in the glorious Kingdom” (Baker, Ibid., p. 483).

ANSWER: Peter did not proclaim that Israel’s LAST DAYS had arrived. What he did do was this: He quoted from a prophecy in Joel which included a number of things which had no relevance to the day of Pentecost. Here is a list of things mentioned in Joel’s prophecy which did not happen at Pentecost: 1) The Spirit was not poured out on all flesh (it was merely poured out on 120 believers); 2) No one saw visions or had dreams; 3) There were no spectacular wonders in heaven above, nor were there signs in the earth such as Joel mentions; 4) The sun was not turned into darkness; 5) the moon was not turned into blood. Why then did Peter quote from Joel’s prophecy? There were two things which Joel mentioned which also took place at Pentecost: 1) There was a supernatural outpouring of the Spirit of God (this was Peter’s answer to the false charge of drunkenness (see verses 13,15): “No, we are not drunk, but we are experiencing a supernatural outpouring of the Spirit similar, in some ways, to what Joel predicted would happen in Israel’s last days.” 2) Those who would call upon the Name of the Lord would be saved (Acts 2:21).

3. “The title, ‘the Church which is His Body,’ is distinctive with Paul. This expression is not used at Pentecost or in other New Testament writings. It might be argued that Paul sometimes refers to the Church without using the full expression: “the Church which is His Body,” and that, therefore, the use of the word “church” in the Pentecost account may in like manner refer to the Body of Christ. There is, however, this difference. When Paul uses the expression “the Church which is His Body,” he is implying that there are other churches or another church which is not His Body. If we should be sent to a certain city and be told to go to a hotel which is called the Biltmore, we would take it for granted there were other hotels in the city, otherwise, why specify the Biltmore?” (Baker, Ibid., p. 483).

ANSWER: More likely Paul is revealing additional truth. The church was formed in Acts 2. Later revelation showed that the church was Christ’s body. The use of the term “body” is that of an analogy and describes how the church functions in relationship to its head who is Christ. To specify a hotel as the Biltmore is to name it but not describe it. Paul was not using the phrase “the Church which is His Body” to differentiate between two or more churches but was using the phrase to describe the relationship of the Church to Christ.

4. “Pentecost was one of the annual Jewish feast days which depict God’s redemptive dealings with Israel in the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom. Whatever Pentecost meant, it is evident that it must have had primary, if not exclusive, reference to Israel. Doubtless all will agree that there was a typology connected with the seven annual feasts of Lev. 23. These feasts were given to Israel. “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel….” It would seem strange indeed if the typology of these feasts of Israel had no reference whatsoever to Israel. In fact, most dispensational commentators refer all of the other six feasts to Israel, and isolate Pentecost and claim that this one does not refer to Israel but to the Gentiles in this dispensation when Israel is set aside” (Baker, Ibid., p. 483)

ANSWER: Baker seems to be making this statement: “If Pentecost involves the church, as dispensationalists teach, then it cannot have anything to do with Israel. But if it involves Israel, then it cannot have anything to do with the church.” However the two are not mutually exclusive. It is obvious that Pentecost is all about Israel! All of the thousands of people present on that day were Jews! God was dealing with Israel in a very special and unique way. God poured out His Spirit upon the believing Jews in a remarkable way. When the church began at Pentecost it was totally an Israelite assembly. There were no Gentiles, only saved Jews. Pentecost was a unique, opportune time for the Lord to form the church out of saved Israel for His own purposes. The gospel went to the “Jew first” (Romans 1:16). Paul himself taught that in the church age there would be a saved remnant of Jews according to the election of grace (Rom. 11:5). It was the Jews who were first added to the Lord to form a very unique organism, the nature and purpose of which would be progressively revealed (compare John 16:12). These Jews knew that Christ was their promised Messiah and that He had died for them and rose again, but they knew little of church truth. God would teach them in His time. [Illustration: Consider a person coming to know Christ today. The moment he is saved he becomes regenerated, sealed with the Spirit, indwelt by the Spirit, baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ, etc. But he probably doesn’t know any of these things. All he knows is that he was a guilty sinner and that Christ died for him and rose again and that whosoever believes in Him has everlasting life. These other truths will be learned gradually in time].

5. “Paul teaches that it was because of the casting away of Israel that his message of reconciliation had been sent to the Gentiles. But at Pentecost Israel had not yet been cast away. The Jew, like the Gentile, had to be alienated from God before both Jews and Gentiles could be reconciled to God in one body. This is why Israel had to be cast away nationally before God could offer reconciliation to the world and form the Body of Christ. This fact is brought out in Rom. 11:15, 32; and Eph. 2:17. If anything is evident from the record it is that God had not yet set Israel aside at Pentecost. The fact that Peter’s first two sermons are addressed exclusively to Israel should be sufficient proof of this, but there can be no gain-saying of this when Peter plainly declares: “Unto you (Israel) first, God having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities: (Acts 3:26)” (Baker, Ibid., p. 484).

ANSWER: Israel was set aside because they rejected the gospel. They rejected their Saviour: “He came unto His own, and His own received Him not” (John 1:11). When did they reject the gospel? They rejected it in the person of their King in the Gospels and they rejected it all through the book of Acts. Christ pronounced judgment upon the leaders of Israel in Matthew 11-12 and also in Matthew 23 (see especially Matthew 11:20-24; 12:38-42; 23:37-38). Romans 11 would have been written about 56 or 57 A.D. Ephesians 2 would have been written in the early 60’s A.D. Acts 2 would have occurred in the early 30s A.D. (see Everett F. Harrison, Introduction to the New Testament). So by the time Paul wrote the books of Romans and Ephesians Israel’s rejection of Christ was set in cement. When does Baker say that Israel finally rejected Christ and was set aside? Acts 13? The fact of the matter is that Israel, as a nation, rejected Christ consistently throughout the gospels and throughout the book of Acts. Only a very small remnant of Jews believed. But God in His mercy and grace sent His gospel message to the Jewish people even after they had crucified His Son. “To the Jew first!”

6. “Not only was Israel not cast away at Pentecost, but it is here that we find the first real offer of the Kingdom to Israel. It was because of their rejection of the King and the Kingdom that a new dispensation under Paul was ushered in. Many dispensationalists have taught that Christ offered the kingdom to Israel in the Gospels and that they rejected it by crucifying Him. Then on the day of Pentecost Israel was set aside and the new Gentile dispensation began. Evidence given in the point immediately above is proof that Israel was still in covenant relation with the Lord at Pentecost. It is true that the kingdom was preached as being “at hand” by Christ (Matt. 4:17; 10:7), but this is not to say that the kingdom could have been offered in the sense that it might have been established before the death of Christ. The prophets testified the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow (1 Pet. 1:11). Christ Himself plainly stated this fact: “But first he must suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation: (Lk. 17:25 cf. 24:26). And that the rejection of Christ in His incarnation was not the unpardonable sin is also plainly stated by Christ: “And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him; neither in this world, neither in the world to come” (Matt.12:32). In fact, that is why Christ prayed for Israel on the Cross: “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do” (Lk. 23:34). And it was because God answered that prayer of His Son that Peter could preach to the very ones who had crucified Jesus: “And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers. But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled” (Acts 3:17-18). And the very next word in the Greek text is “therefore”; therefore, because all have been fulfilled regarding His sufferings, if you will repent and be converted, God will send back Jesus Christ. Here the kingdom is not merely at hand; it is being offered with nothing standing in the way but Israel’s continued rejection of Christ. The point is that God’s offer to send back Jesus Christ to usher in the times of the restoration of all things would surely have been insincere had He already cast Israel aside and begun a new dispensation” (Baker, Ibid., p. 484-485).

ANSWER: It seems quite a stretch to say that the first real offer of the Kingdom to Israel was in Acts 2. We recognize that if the Jews had received and embraced Christ as their King, He would still have had to die on the cross for the sins of the world. William MacDonald suggests that Acts 3:21 shows that God through His foreknowledge knew “Israel would reject Christ, and that the present age of grace would intervene before His Second Coming” (MacDonald, Ibid., p. 1593). The mysteries revealed in Matthew 13 indicate that there would be a period of time between the two advents, when the King is absent from earth, when God’s Word would be preached, but for the most part rejected (parable of the Sower, etc.). God’s offer to send Jesus Christ back to “usher in the times of the restoration of all things” was not insincere. Actually Baker’s point is hypothetical. God could make a sincere offer but in his foreknowledge He knew acceptance of His offer would not occur.

7. “The Body of Christ is a joint-body of Jews and Gentiles, but at Pentecost there is no mention of the Gentiles. The message is directed specifically to, and only to, the men of Israel. There were doubtless many Gentiles in Jerusalem at that time, at least, we know there was a Roman garrison there. Had Peter known that Israel had been cast aside and that God was beginning a new Gentile dispensation, it is very strange that he constantly addresses his message to the men of Israel and never mentions the Gentiles” (Baker, Ibid., p. 485).

ANSWER: Yes, the body of Christ IS a joint-body of Jews and Gentiles, but at the beginning it was not. At the beginning it was 100% Israelites and stayed that way until the first Samaritans (Acts 8) and Gentiles (Acts 10) were saved. At some point in the first century there was a 50% blend of Jews and Gentiles, but as time went on more and more Gentiles got saved and fewer and fewer Jews. Today, [with sadness we say this], the percentage of Jews is so minute that it is probably safe to say that 99% or more of the church is composed of Gentile believers and the true Israel of God (the present Jewish remnant according to the election of grace—Rom. 11:5) is very tiny part of the whole. You may have been a part of a local assembly in which (sad to say) there were no saved Jews at all. The believers were all saved Gentiles. This is not an unusual situation in many churches today, even though we would certainly desire to have in our assemblies those who are saved Jews. Because a church is not a joint-body of Jews and Gentiles (at any point in time), does this mean that it is not a true local church? Obviously not. God saves people and adds them to His body as it pleases Him.

8. “A part of the Pentecostal celebration was the presentation of the two “wave loaves” as described in Leviticus 23:17-20. Acts 2 dispensationalists interpret these two loaves as representing Jews and Gentiles being brought into the Church of this dispensation. This could not be, since the Church of this dispensation was hidden from men in all former ages. It has been suggested that the two loaves represent the two houses of Israel which will be united in the Kingdom (Ezekiel 37:15-22). The Body of Christ is not two loaves. Rather, Paul states in 1 Corinthians 10:17 that we are one loaf” (Baker, Ibid., p. 485).

ANSWER: Baker’s position is very weak if he must argue from typology. One’s prior understanding of the significance of Pentecost will determine the identification of the antitype. Since Baker has already determined that the church which is His body cannot be found in Acts 2, then it’s obvious that he must find some other anti-type. He chooses the two houses of Israel, and yet there is nothing in the context of Acts 2 that has anything to do with the re-uniting of the two houses of Israel in the Kingdom.

9. “At Pentecost the believers received water baptism for the remission of sins. There is no record that Paul ever practiced baptism for this purpose. In fact, water baptism was not even a part of his commission (1 Corinthians 1:17)” (Baker, Ibid., p. 485).

ANSWER: This objection by Baker indicates a very serious flaw in his theology. He seems to be teaching that during the early period of Acts water baptism was one of the requirements for salvation. This is a serious distortion of the grace of God. One of Baker's associates, C. R. Stam, even went so far as to write that "...while the commission to the eleven did stipulate water baptism as a requirement for salvation and designate miraculous signs as evidences of salvation, this commission was superceded by another, as the twelve apostles were superseded by Paul" (Cornelius R. Stam, Baptism and the Bible). People have never been saved by works and have never been saved by water baptism. Saints of all dispensations have always been saved in only one way: BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH. It is not of works. It is not of yourselves. It is not by water baptism. Salvation is only by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The only requirement is “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 16:31). Baker, of course, also believes that the Great Commission along with its command concerning water baptism (Matthew 28:18-20) is not for the church today.
For a detailed study of how water baptism relates to salvation, see: Does Water Baptism Save? A Biblical Refutation of Baptismal Regeneration
The believers were baptized BECAUSE of the remission of sins. As Ryrie has pointed out “The Greek preposition eis, for, has this meaning “because of” not only here but also in such a passage as Matthew 12:41 where the meaning can only be “they repented because of [not in order to] the preaching of Jonah” (Charles C. Ryrie, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 24). As for I Cor. 1:17 Paul is merely making the point that “his main business was not to baptize” (MacDonald, Ibid., p. 1749). Earlier in 1 Corinthians 1:14, 16 Paul indicated that he had baptized believers at Corinth. Paul baptized believers in water but Charles Baker and his followers do not.
While Ryrie’s understanding of Acts 2:38 (see above paragraph) is valid and grammatically possible, there is another way to understand Acts 2:38 which also avoids falling into the error of baptismal regeneration:

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” (Acts 2:38).

This passage has become one of the favorite verses of those who teach baptismal regeneration. Placed in a motel room was a Gideon Bible and near the front cover there was a section with John 3:16 written out in many different languages. In this particular Bible someone had crossed out all of the John 3:16 verses and in big letters had written ACTS 2:38. The person who had defaced this Bible was communicating something like this: “You are deceived if you think that John 3:16 presents the true gospel. It doesn’t present the true gospel at all. It’s not enough to believe in Christ. To be saved and to be forgiven a person also needs to be baptized in water. The true gospel is much better presented in ACTS 2:38!”
When it comes to having sins forgiven, what must a person do? The Bible teaches that it is faith and repentance that brings about forgiveness. Repentance and faith are two sides of the same coin. You can’t have true repentance without having true faith. You can’t have true faith without having true repentance. They go together. The Bible sometimes mentions repentance as the only condition of salvation. One example of this would be Luke 13:3, “I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.” See also Luke 15:7,10 and Acts 17:30. A few times both repentance and faith are mentioned in the same verse (Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21). There are many, many verses which mention only faith as the condition of salvation (John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; Acts 16:31; etc.). When only repentance is mentioned, faith is implied or assumed. When only faith is mentioned, repentance is implied or assumed. Where you have one you must have the other.

What is repentance? The word means “a change of mind.” It means to change your mind about sin, self and the Saviour. It especially has to do with one’s recognition of his true condition before God. One Biblical definition of repentance is found in Job 42:4. Job said, “Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.” According to this verse, to repent is to abhor oneself, to discover how vile we are (see Job 40:4), to discover our utter wretchedness and sinfulness. No one can be saved unless he changes his mind about sin and self and recognizes how sinful he really is in God’s sight.

Harry Ironside explained repentance as follows: “Repentance is just the sick man’s acknowledgment of his illness. It is simply the sinner recognizing his guilt and confessing his need of deliverance....(repentance) is judging oneself in the presence of God; turning right about-face, turning to God with a sincere, earnest desire to be completely delivered from sin. And when a man takes that attitude toward God and puts his faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, he finds salvation” (Luke, pp. 253-254).

In another place Ironside said, “Literally [repentance] means ‘a change of mind.’ It actually implies a complete reversal of one’s inward attitude. To repent is to change one’s attitude toward self, toward sin, toward God, toward Christ....So to face these tremendous facts is to change one’s mind completely, so that the pleasure lover sees and confesses the folly of his empty life; the self-indulgent learns to hate the passions that express the corruption of his nature; the self-righteous sees himself a condemned sinner in the eyes of a holy God; the man who has been hiding from God seeks to find a hiding place in Him; the Christ-rejector realizes and owns his need of a Redeemer, and so believes unto life and salvation” (Except Ye Repent, pages 15-16).

True faith requires repentance because to be saved a person must recognize his lost estate and see himself as lost and helpless and vile and wicked and utterly sinful. True repentance requires faith because the man who repents believes what God has said about his true condition (Romans 3:10-23) and he also believes that God has provided a perfect solution in the person of His Son, God’s only Saviour.

Now let us return to our discussion of Acts 2:38. We have already seen that faith (which would include repentance), not baptism, is essential for the forgiveness of sins. This is clearly seen in Peter’s very next sermon, found in Acts 3:19—“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” Notice that in this verse Peter says nothing about water baptism. If water baptism is essential for the forgiveness of sins, why does Peter say nothing of this in Acts 3:19? If water baptism is essential for forgiveness of sins, why does Peter say nothing of this in Acts 10:43 (“To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission (forgiveness) of sins”). If water baptism is an essential part of the preaching of salvation, then why does Luke 24:46-47 mention repentance and the remission (forgiveness) of sins but say nothing about water baptism? Even in the days of John the Baptist, it was repentance that was for the remission of sins, not water baptism (see Mark 1:4). John's baptism was an outward demonstration to show publicly that repentance had already taken place.
Forgiveness is received at the point of repentance/faith, not at the point of water baptism. Those who are not forgiven should not be baptized. They are yet in their sins. One simple parenthesis helps us to understand what Acts 2:38 is really saying, “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.”

The real question centers on the meaning of the preposition eis (translated "for" in the KJV). It is possible to show examples where eis can mean "because of" (Matthew 12:41--"at") or "on the basis of" or "with reference to," and all of these are certainly grammatically possible. However, it seems more natural and more probable that in Acts 2:38 this preposition indicates purpose or result. Peter was preaching to unsaved Jews who were guilty of crucifying Christ. They desperately needed the forgiveness of sins (as we all do). Peter was telling them what they must do in order to have forgiveness (see Acts 2:37---"What shall we do?").

The translations seem to support this meaning. The KJV, NASB, Amplified, NEB, RSV all give the rendering "for." The Revised Version has "unto." The NIV has "so that your sins will be forgiven" (although in later editions this was changed to "for"). You can see how a person believing in baptismal regeneration could easily use all of these translations to support his view.
The lexicons seem to support this meaning. Arndt & Gingrich say that the preposition here denotes purpose ("in order to") and they render the phrase: "for forgiveness of sins, so that sins might be forgiven." Thayer has a similar rendering "to obtain the forgiveness of sins" (his discussion under baptizo). Thus those who believe that a man is saved by water baptism would gladly appeal to these authorities.
Acts 3:19 seems to support this meaning of the preposition “eis.” This is the very next sermon that Peter gives, and again he tells the Jews what they must do to have forgiveness. We would expect that what Peter told the Jews in Acts 3 would be similar to what he told them in Acts 2. In both cases he was preaching to unsaved Jews under similar circumstances. In Acts 3:19 once again the preposition eis is used, and the KJV translates it "so that your sins might be blotted out." Of course, those who teach baptismal regeneration do not make much of this verse because water baptism is not even mentioned.
The grammarians also concede that the preposition may be translated "for the purpose of' or "in order that" (see Dana & Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 104). Those such as A.T.Robinson and Julius Mantey who render it “because of” or “on the basis of” do so primarily on the basis of theology, not grammar. They suggest a rare usage for the term in order to not make the verse teach baptismal regeneration. But are we really forced to depart from what seems to be the more natural and more common rendering?
Most commentators, regardless of the view they hold, understand the prepositional phrase ("for the remission of sins") as belonging with the verb "be baptized." It is possible, however, that the phrase is actually part of a chiasmus (inverted parallelism) and should be connected not with the command "Be baptized" but with the command "Repent." The verse contains two commands and two prepositional phrases which can be represented by the following chiasmus:

A. Repent

B. Be Baptized

B. In the Name of Jesus Christ

A. For the remission of sins

In English we would best represent this structure by using a parenthesis: "Repent (and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ) for the remission of sins." This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches (only Peter there omits the parenthesis). In Acts 3:19 Peter could have said, "Repent (and be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ) so that your sins may be blotted out!"

Indeed, the Bible consistently connects "repentance" with "the forgiveness of sins" (see Luke 24:47 where Peter received his commission; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 5:31). On the day of Pentecost the Jews would have understood this because the only baptism that they knew about was the baptism of John which was a baptism of repentance UNTO (eis) the remission of sins.

The strengths of this view are as follows: 1) it is theologically sound and avoids the error of making water baptism a condition for forgiveness; 2) it harmonizes with the other passages which speak about repentance and the forgiveness of sins; 3) it understands the preposition eis in its most natural meaning (though other meanings are possible); 4) it agrees with the parallel passage of Acts 3:19; 5) it best suits the context of Acts 2:38 where Peter is offering forgiveness to Christ-rejecting Jews. Peter was not speaking "with reference to" or "because of" or "on the basis of" a forgiveness which they did not yet have! 6) it employs a figure of speech (chiasmus) that was not uncommon or unusual to the Semitic mind, though in English it may seem somewhat awkward.

Stanley D. Toussaint (The Book of Acts in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, p. 359) gives several reasons why the parenthetical view is the correct view:

Several factors support this interpretation: (a) The verb makes a distinction between singular and plural verbs and nouns. The verb "repent" is plural ["repent ye"] and so is the pronoun "your" in the clause, "so that your sins may be forgiven" (lit., "unto the remission of your sins," (eis aphesin ton hamartion humon). Therefore the verb "repent" must go with the purpose of forgiveness of sins. On the other hand the imperative "be baptized" is singular, setting it off from the rest of the sentence. (b) This concept fits with Peter's proclamation in Acts 10:43 in which the same expression "sins may be forgiven" (aphesis harmartion) occurs. There it is granted on the basis of faith alone. (c) In Luke 24:47 and Acts 5:31 the same writer, Luke, indicates that repentance results in remission of sins.

10. “At Pentecost there is no indication that the Spirit baptism was forming a new Body. To the contrary it is stated that this baptism resulted in receiving Power from on high (Luke 24:49). This baptism was experiential, resulting in great signs and wonders. The baptism which forms the Body is not experiential. There is no sensation or feeling when the Spirit does his work. At Pentecost Christ was the Baptizer. In 1 Corinthians 12:13 the Holy Spirit is the Baptizer” (Baker, Ibid., p. 485).

ANSWER: Why must the Scriptures indicate that Spirit baptism was forming the body of Christ at Pentecost? Why could it not progressively be revealed later in the Scriptures? As MacDonald observes “there are four communities of believers in the Book of Acts, and the order of events in connection with the reception of the Holy Spirit is different in each case” (MacDonald, Ibid., p 1597). The prophecy of Luke 24:49 was fulfilled in Acts 2. The gift of the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans in Acts 8:14-17, the Gentiles in Acts 10:44-48 and the disciples of John the Baptist in Acts 19:1-7 are all unique from each other for God’s purpose. Once each initial group had received the Holy Spirit there would not be any reason to continue these unique experiences of receiving the Spirit.

11. “At Pentecost Christ was the Baptizer, baptizing with or in the Holy Spirit. In Corinthians 12:13 the Holy Spirit is the Baptizer, baptizing into Christ” (Baker, Ibid., p. 485).

ANSWER: Actually the Greek constructions are basically the same in Acts and I Corinthians 12:13. As Zeller writes:

But someone might raise an objection and say, "The Spirit baptism mentioned in Matthew 3:11 and Acts 1:5 is different from the Spirit baptism mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:13. In Matthew 3:11 and Acts 1:5 Christ is the Baptizer, but in 1 Corinthians 12:13 the Holy Spirit is the Baptizer. As we read the English Bible this seems to be the case, but the Greek construction of Matthew 3:11 and Acts 1:5 is practically identical to 1 Corinthians 12:13 as the following chart illustrates.

All four of these passages are talking about the same baptism, and the Greek construction in all four passages is closely equivalent, as the following literal rendering reveals:

Passage
Greek Construction

Matthew. 3:11
He (Christ) shall baptize you with (in) Holy Spirit

Acts 1:5
You You shall be baptized (by Christ-Matt. 3:11) with (in) Holy Spirit

Acts 11:16
You shall be baptized (by Christ-Matt. 3:11) with (in) Holy Spirit

1 Cor. 12:13
We all were be baptized (by Christ-Matt. 3:11) with (in) one Spirit into one body


The order of the words in 1 Corinthians 12:13 has been altered in order to show that the same Greek construction is used. In the King James Version the Greek preposition en is translated "By one Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:13) which has led some to wrongly conclude that the Spirit is the Baptizer. But the passage should be understood in this way: "With (en) one Spirit were we all baptized( by Christ) into one body (the body of Christ, His Church)" (George Zeller, When Did The Church Begin?, a study published by the Middletown Bible Church).

On the other hand, it is possible that both Christ and the Spirit had a part in doing the baptizing. Christ could have baptized believers into the body by allowing the Spirit to actually do this work. This is illustrated in John 4:1-2. In John 4:1 we are told that Jesus baptized disciples, even more than John the Baptist. In John 4:2 we discover that Jesus Himself did not baptize anyone! How could He baptize many but not baptize anyone? The answer is that Jesus baptized many disciples but He did this by allowing His disciples to be the ones who actually did the work of baptism. It’s possible that this is the case in 1 Corinthians 12:13. Jesus Christ is the Baptizer (in light of Matthew 3:11; Acts 1:5, etc.) but the actual work of baptizing was carried out by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was the instrument that Christ used to carry out His baptizing work. This concept is not foreign to the New Testament epistles. We would all agree that Jesus saves and yet the actual work of salvation is carried out by the Spirit of God (see 1 Corinthians 9:11).

It is certainly not incorrect to say that Christ immerses His believers into the body of Christ, and thus has rightful claim to the title of the Baptizer. In Matthew 16:18 we learn that it is Christ Himself who will BUILD His church. In Acts 2:47 we learn that it is the Lord (Jesus Christ) who adds to the church daily such as should be saved. Consider also Acts 2:33 where the Lord Jesus is the One who sheds forth the Spirit. The Lord Jesus, in perfect co-operation with the blessed Person of the Holy Spirit, accomplished this great work, to the praise of the glory of His grace.

12. “Finally, and perhaps the most convincing, is the fact that everything that happened at Pentecost was in direct fulfillment of prophecy. Peter quotes Joel and David in Acts 2, and in Acts 3:24 he says: “Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.” But Paul says that the truth about the Body of Christ is a “mystery which has been hid from ages and from generations, but is now made manifest to his saints” (Col. 1:24-26). It is very difficult to believe that that which every prophet of old predicted is that which has been hidden from ages and generations. The above twelve reasons are fully supported by the Scripture and surely overweigh any evidence to the contrary that the Body of Christ and the dispensation of the Mystery began on Israel’s feast of Pentecost” (Baker, Ibid., p. 485-486).

ANSWER: This is a common ultradispensational argument: If there is prophecy then there cannot be mystery. In other words, prophecy and the church are mutually exclusive. Where you have one, you can’t have the other.

But this reasoning condemns their very own system because prophecy is also found in Acts 13 and Acts 28 where moderate ultradispensationalists and extreme ultradispensationalists begin the church respectively.

Take Acts 13, for example. Paul’s message given at Antioch in Pisidia is given in verses 14-41. This entire message is immersed in the Old Testament and it ends with a reference to that which was spoken of by the prophets and quotes from Habakkuk 1:5 (see Acts 13:40-41). Later in Acts 13 Paul says, “It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you (Jews); but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles” (v.46). Paul then indicates that this was in some way a fulfillment of Isaiah 49:6 (see v.47). If I were an ultradispensationalists and wanted to find a place to begin the church which had no connection with O.T. prophecy, I certainly would not want to choose Acts 13.

Acts 28 is similar. Again the Jewish people were rejecting the gospel message and again Paul indicates that “salvation is sent unto the Gentiles and that they will hear it” (v.28). But Paul made this statement based on the great prophecy of Isaiah 6:9-10 (see verses 25-27). If prophecy and church are mutually exclusive, then I would not want to begin the church in Acts 28.
We should also keep in mind that, strictly speaking, the Bible never calls the church a mystery. The New Testament mysteries, especially those revealed by Paul, usually relate to some precious aspect of church truth, but never is the church called a mystery.

The concept that church and prophecy are mutually exclusive can easily be disproved. Here are some examples:

1. There is no greater “mystery” chapter than Ephesians chapter 3, and therein we find church truth richly revealed. But immediately following this Paul addresses the subject of the ascended Christ giving gifted men to the church (Eph. 4:7-12) and he quotes from an Old Testament prophecy found in Psalm 68:18!

2. In Ephesians 2 Paul is describing the church as a special and unique temple indwelt by God with Christ as the chief corner stone (compare Isaiah 28:16). In this same context Paul speaks of the fact that Christ is our peace and that out of Jews and Gentiles God has made ONE NEW MAN (v.15) in ONE BODY (v.16), and yet in the very next verse he quotes from Isaiah 57:19!

3. In the very passage in which Paul sets forth the mystery that not all believers shall sleep (1 Cor. 15:51) the prophecy of Isaiah 25:8 is mentioned (verse 53).

4. The great mystery of Ephesians 5:32 is based upon a verse in Genesis 2!

5. Peter sets forth church truth when he says that believers are unique “stones” making up a “spiritual house” (1 Pet. 2:5) but the very next verse quotes the prophecy of Isaiah 28:16!

6. In Romans 9:25-33 Paul sets forth the fact that during this present church age Israel is blinded and God is showing mercy to the Gentiles. Paul uses several prophecies from Old Testament Scriptures to make his point.

7. The gift of tongues is one of the gifts given to the church (1 Cor. 12:10) but Paul cites the prophecy in Isaiah 28:11-12 to explain the significance of this church gift!

Conclusion

Baker’s dozen points are thought provoking but when weighed in the light of Biblical teaching, they are found wanting. The differences between dispensationalists (classic dispensationalists) and ultradispensationalists are many. Baker and other ultradispensationalists try to argue strongly that the church did not start in Acts 2 but they muster very few sound arguments for why they believe it started at some later time (and there is considerable variation in ultradispensational circles as to when the church really began). One of the biggest problems they have is a misunderstanding of 1 Corinthians 12:13 and the grammar involved, and thus they wrongly teach that there are two Spirit baptisms in the New Testament. They seem to ignore the fact that Paul persecuted “the church of God” or else they claim that the church of God that Paul persecuted was different from the “church which is His body”! Finally, one key question is how soon God has to indicate or reveal a change in His program. Ultradispensationalists have great difficulty believing that God can start a new work and then gradually and progressively reveal the nature and purpose of His new program when and as it pleases Him.

 

[lightninboy]

I'm on Bob Hill's Biblical Answers Bible Forums. Check it out.

http://www.biblicalanswers.com/biblicalanswers_bible_forums_frameset.htm

 

[lightninboy]

http://www.starlightresearch.com/ActsProblems.html

DOCTRINAL PROBLEMS OF ACTS 2 DISPENSATIONALISM
by Robert C. Brock

However, I do not want to give the impression that the Acts 2 viewpoint of the Bible is all bad. They have contributed much to our understanding of Biblical truth through scholarly books and journals. Most of the books in my library have been written by Acts 2 Dispensational scholars.
But, there are 28 teachings involving the Church and its ministry that need to be reviewed and revised in their system. The Pauline Dispensationalism is the only one who can do this.
There are two main schools of Dispensationalism - the Acts 2 viewpoint and the Pauline viewpoint. Differences between dispensationalists are chiefly in the area of Ecclesiology, the doctrine of the Church.
The Acts 2 position is much weaker than the Pauline position. This is because the Acts 2 position has much in common with Reformed Theology when it comes to an understanding of the truth about the Church. Acts 2 Dispensationalists are VERY INCONSISTENT in their separation of what belongs to Israel and what belongs to the Church, as we are going to learn.

PROBLEM NO. 1--THAT THERE IS ONLY 'ONE GOSPEL' IN THE BIBLE
The Scofield Bible is a good example of the Acts 2 position concerning the gospel.' On page 1343 of the old Scofield Bible (the 1909 edition) it states in its note on 'Gospel:' "Four forms of the Gospel are to be distinguished." It mentions the Gospel of the Kingdom, the Gospel of the grace of God, the Everlasting Gospel, and Paul's 'My Gospel.' Then at the bottom of the note it refers to 'another Gospel' that is mentioned in Gal. 1:6, inferring that it is a false gospel. This note uses the word 'gospel' in the singular.
A very common argument that is used to show that there is only 'one gospel' in the Bible has to do with the doctrine of justification by faith. It is taught that since Abraham and David were justified by faith (Ran. 4:1-8) and lived in the Old Testament, and that we today are also justified by faith (Rom. 5:1), then the same gospel must be preached in both Testaments.
Another common argument is that there is only one purpose of God in the Bible, consequently, one gospel. While this is basic to Reformed Theology, Acts 2 Dispensationalists go along with it because it seems to give some credence to the 'one gospel' theory.
They also use Romans 1:1-2 to show that the Gospel is found in the Old Testament.

THE TRUTH
In Galatians 1:6 there is 'another gospel,' a HETEROS gospel which is a gospel of a different kind. The Gospel of the Kingdom is what the Judaizers preached to the Galatian believers, not a 'false gospel' that Acts 2 people use to identify 'another gospel.' The Gospel of the Kingdom is a gospel of a different kind.
In Galatians 1:7 you have 'the gospel of Christ,' which is another name for the Gospel of the grace of God; and in Gal. 3:8 the 'gospel preached unto Abraham' is what Jehovah God told him in Genesis 12:3; 15:5-6. Besides these three gospels in Galatians, there is 'the Everlasting Gospel' of Rev. 14:6.
The theory of 'one gospel' needs to be seen as a major problem because so much hinges on it. Are we saved today by the gospel revealed to Paul, or are we saved by the Gospel preached by Peter? We can't be saved by both of them together. The Gospel of the Kingdom will make you religious today, but the Gospel of the grace of God alone will prepare you for heaven in God's spiritual realm of the Fourth Dimension.
When one reads Romans 1:1-2, it sounds like there is only 'one gospel' in the Bible: "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God [21 which He had promised afore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures."
The Gospel of the grace of God is not found in the Old Testament.

PROBLEM NO. 2--THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO BE SAVED
This is a logical conclusion based on problem no. 1, that there is only one gospel. Acts 2 Dispensationalists are very strong on maintaining that salvation throughout the ages has ALWAYS been by grace through faith. In order to support this, they teach that the principle found in Eph. 2:8-9 is true of the whole Bible (Reformed theology teaches this too). Charles C. Ryrie, in his book 'Dispensationalism Today' (1965), on pages 113-115, quotes from L.S. Chafer, C.I. Scofield, and W.L. Pettingill in support of the Acts 2 position. In a more recent book 'Continuity and Discontinuity' (1988) edited by John S. Feinberg, the author who takes the discontinuity position on salvation (Allen P. Ross) also believes that Eph. 2:8-9 pertains to the old Testament, page 164.

THE TRUTH
Salvation under the Kingdom program of Israel was according to the MERCY OF GOD: "Help me, O LORD my God. O save me according to Thy mercy' (Psalm 109:26). This verse is very clear, and the saints in the Old Testament were familiar with this Divine principle. They knew that this was the way God worked under their economy in the old Testament. Please read Psalm 136. The word 'mercy' is used 26 times in 26 verses! This is the Biblical testimony as to how God worked in the Old Testament.
During our Lord's earthly ministry, this principle of salvation still prevailed, as clearly seen in Luke 1:67-79. Zachariah was filled with Holy Spirit Power (v. 67) when he stated that his son John would 'go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways; to give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, through the tender mercy of our God..." (vs. 76-78). Remission (forgiveness) of sins was by water baptism (Mark 1:4-5; 16:16; Acts 2:38), a doctrine that was preached all through our Lord's earthly ministry and on into the book of Acts.
What has really confused Acts 2 believers (and Reformed believers also) is the fact that God has required FAITH in all dispensations in order to be saved. Because of this they think that God has said the same thing and that salvation has always been the same way.
At the very beginning of the Bible, we have the story in Genesis 4 of Cain and Abel, the first two children of Adam and Eve. The two boys were faithfully instructed by their parents in how to approach a holy God. Along with faith God required a sacrifice, a truth that was well-known to Adam and Eve, by God providing two coats of skins with the slaying of two animals (Gen. 3:21). The God-given plan or formula of 'faith plus a sacrifice' was taught to our very first parents, Adam and Eve. This Divine principle prevailed all through the Old Testament, having been incorporated into the law of Moses.
But this is not so, today. All God requires today is 'faith' in His Son, Christ Jesus our Lord (Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8-9). This 'faith only' principle is unique to this Dispensation of grace; hence, it is by grace in contrast to what God's plan was in the Old Testament through His mercy. Grace and Mercy are not synonymous terms. Therefore, it is wrong to teach that the principle contained in Eph. 2:8-9 is taught all through the Bible.
The Acts 2 position has difficulty with the Gospel of the Kingdom, as Ryrie has shown us, as he conveniently avoided Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 in his discussion of salvation. Pauline Dispensationalism is the only system of theology that-knows how to understand Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38. There is Divine truth in those verses which is not related to this Dispensation of grace. There is no need to twist them in order to teach something else. There is no need to go to the Greek text of Westcott and Hort either, which leaves out Mark 16:16. They were a part of Israel's Kingdom Gospel, and will be preached again during the Tribulation Period (Matt. 24:13-14).

PROBLEM NO. 3--PAULINE TRUTH IS JUST A CONTINUATION OF WHAT JESUS TAUGHT IN HIS EARTHLY MINISTRY

PROBLEM No. 4--THAT THE MYSTERY REVEALED TO PAUL IS ONLY ABOUT THE FORMATION OF THE BODY OF CHRIST.

PROBLEM NO. 5--THAT EVERY MEMBER OF THE BODY OF CHRIST NEEDS TO BE WATER BAPTIZED
THE TRUTH

Water baptism has no place and has no value for believers during this Dispensation of grace. There are two strong, clear statements in Paul's letters that teach this truth. ONLY Paul could write from this perspective.
1. Eph. 4:5 states, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." This verse is a part of the seven unities of the Holy Spirit. There is a Divine balance in the arrangement of these seven truths:
To get around this, Acts 2 brethren teach that baptism is a 'type or 'symbol' of the believer's identification with Christ (Rom. 6:3-4). They also teach that Paul's main ministry was to preach the gospel and his secondary ministry was that of baptizing, and if he couldn't do the baptizing, an assistant did this work for him. These ideas are nothing but human inventions brought about because of being inconsistent in understanding the truth related to Israel and to the Body of Christ.
The so-called great commission of Matthew and Mark does contain water baptism, and the Lord did command His disciples to baptize those who desired to be saved. But this baptism was for the forgiveness of sins, as Peter well knew on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38). This is not Christianity but Evangelical Judaism.
That the Church, the Body of Christ, began on the Day of Pentecost presents one of the major problems of Acts 2 Dispensationalism. As a matter of fact, many Reformed teachers also believe this. The Day of Pentecost is strictly a part of Judaism, and the church that is mentioned in that chapter (in verse 47) was completely made up of Jewish believers who looked to the Lord as their Messiah and Saviour. More will be said about this in Problem No. 9.
Following Christ in baptism is not a spiritual concept. It is a carnal, fleshly idea. We are not to follow our Lord in His earthly ministry (2 Cor. 5:16). It is impossible to follow Him in baptism because His baptism was unique. It was never intended to be copied. The 12 Apostles never copied it, so why should we? The only reason for a water baptism rite for the people of Israelwas for the forgiveness of sins, and the cross makes this rite obsolete. Besides, the risen Christ NEVER told members of the Body of Christ to be baptized with or in water. (See my booklet on 'Baptism' for a fuller discussion).

PROBLEM NO. 6--THAT OTHER NEW TESTAMENT WRITERS REFER TO THE RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH BESIDES PAUL
The Scriptures where the Rapture is supposed to be found outside of Paul's letters are John 14:2-3; Rev. 4:1; 1 John 3:2; 1 Peter 1:3-5, and Matt. 24:37-42. The words 'come' and 'appear' are found in these passages. In addition, the Greek word 'PAROUSIA' is supposed to refer to the Second Coming of Christ.

PROBLEM No. 7--THAT THE CHURCH, THE BODY OF CHRIST, IS ALSO THE BRIDE OF CHRIST
This is a favorite theme of Acts 2 Dispensationalists. The Scripture passages they use to support this theory are John 3:29, Rev. 19:7-9, 2 Cor. 11:2, Eph. 5:31-32, and Romans 7:4.

THE TRUTH
The Apostle Paul said nothing about the Body of Christ being the Bride of Christ. This 'doctrine' has come about because of mixing the truth given to John and Paul, whose apostleships were different in calling and ministry.

PROBLEM NO. 8 --THAT THE NEW COVENANT WITH ITS BLESSINGS AND SALVATION IS FOR THE CHURCH, THE BODY OF CHRIST

PROBLEM NO. 9 --THAT THE DAY OF PENTECOST IS THE BEGINNING OF THE CHURCH, THE BODY OF CHRIST. THIS INCLUDES THE DISPENSATION OF THE GRACE OF GOD
Their main argument for starting the Church in Acts 2 is the baptism of the Holy Spirit mentioned in Acts 2:4 and in Acts 11:15-16. They say that this 'baptism' places believers into the Body of Christ, thereby equating this with the 'baptism' of 1 Cor. 12:13 (Dispensationalism Today by C.C. Ryrie, pages 136,137; Moody Press; 1965).
They also point to the word 'church' in Acts 2:47 of the King James Bible. Of course, they believe that Peter preached Christianity on this day and that he presented the death, burial and resurrection of Christ for salvation; in other words, Peter preached the Gospel of the grace of God.

THE TRUTH
Charles F. Baker, in his 'A Dispensational Theology,' pages 483-486, gives 12 Scriptural reasons why the Church, the Body of Christ, could not have begun on the Day of Pentecost. The Day of Pentecost covers two whole chapters - Acts 2 and 3.

2. The baptism of the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:16) was administered by the Lord Jesus Christ just as John the Baptist said He would do, as recorded in Matt. 3:11, "...He [Jesus] shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit..." This baptizing ministry of our Lord was done on the Day of Pentecost. This baptism was NOT performed by the Holy Spirit like we read about in 1 Cor. 12:13, "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one Body..." Acts 2 Dispensationalists cannot understand that the two baptisms mentioned here are DIFFERENT BAPTISMS performed by two different members of the Godhead. The verse in 1 Cor. 12:13 does not relate to the Day of Pentecost. They confuse the ministry of Christ with the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Their arguments for putting 1 Cor. 12:13 into Acts 2 are very weak.
How did Peter proclaim the death and resurrection of Christ?
First of all, the Apostle Peter accused the Nation of murdering their Messiah. He told them twice that they killed Him (Acts 2:23), and they killed the Prince of life (Acts 3:15).
Second, in relation to the resurrection, Peter said that God raised Him from the dead in order to sit on David's throne (Acts 2:30). This is one of the reasons for the resurrection of Christ.
The Apostle Paul did not teach about the death and resurrection of Christ like Peter did.

The Gospel of the Kingdom is NOT God's message for this Age of grace. Acts 2 brethren know this but do not know what to do with it. They do not like what Peter taught about being baptized in water MR the forgiveness of sins. They realize that this is not the same thing that Paul wrote in Eph. 1:7 and in Col. 1:14, that forgiveness of sins is NOW by the blood of Christ.
One of America's greatest Greek scholars, A.T. Robertson, a very strong Baptist teacher, strongly disliked Acts 2:38. He taught that the 'for' in the phrase 'be baptized ... FOR the remission of sins' means 'because of.' The Greek preposition for 'for' is EIS. He used Matt. 12:41 as the proof, where it is stated 'they repented at [EIS] the preaching of Jonah.' He also said in his book 'A Grammar of the-Greek New Testament' on page 592 in relation to Acts 2:38, that the right translation of this verse depended on the interpreter instead of the grammarian (translator). In a list of meanings for EIS, he left out 'for,' a legitimate meaning that the Greek lexicons recognize. The meaning of 'because of' is not recognized by the lexicons for EIS.

PROBLEM NO. 10 --THAT THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT IS BEING FULFILLED DURING THIS AGE OF GRACE

PROBLEM NO. 11 --THAT THE SEVEN CHURCHES IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION ARE A PART OF THE BODY OF CHRIST

PROBLEM NO. 12 --THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE PURPOSE AND PLAN OF GOD FOR THE HUMAN RACE IN THE BIBLE.

PROBLEM NO. 13 --THAT THE TWELVE APOSTLES ARE MEMBERS OF THE BODY OF CHRIST

PROBLEM NO. 14 --THAT THE WRITINGS OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES ARE ADDRESSED TO THE
BODY OF CHRIST
These two problems are put together because they are so closely related. Problem No. 14 is the logical conclusion coming from Problem No. 13. Otherwise there would be no purpose to the writings of the Kingdom Apostles.

THE TRUTH
1 . The Twelve preached the Gospel of the Kingdom during their ministry BEFORE and AFTER the death and resurrection of Christ. Many signs and miracles were done by the Apostles while preaching this Gospel (Matt. 10:8; Acts 2:43).

PROBLEM NO. 15, --THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE BODY OF CHRIST CONSTITUTE A PRIESTHOOD OF BELIEVERS

PROBLEM NO. 16 --THAT THE COMMISSION THE LORD JESUS GAVE TO THE DISCIPLES IN
MARK 16:15-18 AND IN MATT. 28:18-20 IS FOR THE BODY OF CHRIST
Acts 2 theologians (and Reformed theologians) call this 'The Great Commission.' Three other passages of Scripture are also included in this commission - Luke 24:46-49; John 20:23; and Acts 1:8.

THE TRUTH
1. The WORLD of Mark 16:15, in the phrase 'Go into all the world' refers to the Gentiles according to the ' Abrahamic Covenant. But before they could go to the Gentiles, they had to begin in Jerusalem and then go to Judea and Samaria (Acts 1:8). The phrase in Acts 1:8 'the end of the earth' is the same area as the 'world' in Mark 16:15. The order as given in Acts 1:8 is important and needed to be fulfilled in the order as it was written by Luke.
The very first verse in the New Testament sets the tone for our Lord's earthly ministry, "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham" (Matt. 1:1). The mention of David and Abraham should immediately remind one of the Covenants in the Old Testament that God made with those two men (2 Sam. 7:12-29 - DAVID: Gen. 12:1-3 - ABRAHAM). The Gentiles do have a place in these Covenants, but only THROUGH the saved Nation of Israel as it represents Jehovah God in His dealings with mankind. This is where Mark 16:15 canes in, and why the order of territory in Acts 1:8 is so important. The Hebrew people in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria needed to be saved FIRST before the Twelve Apostles could go to the end of the earth. Since this did not happen in the book of Acts under the Apostles' ministry, this Divine order will be carried out during the Tribulation Period and in the Millennium. Paul was familiar with this truth, as he indicated in Romans 15:8-12.
2. The GOSPEL that is referred to in this commission is the Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus and His disciples preached in the 4 Gospels (Matt. 9:35). This is the only 'gospel' preached during our Lord's earthly ministry. This is the only 'gospel' that the disciples knew. To teach that the Gospel of the grace of God, which was LATER revealed to the Apostle Paul by the risen Christ (Acts 20:24), is the gospel of the great commission is totally wrong.
3. The TERMS of the Gospel of the Kingdom are: (1) to believe, (2) be baptized with water for salvation (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38). Mark expressed it in the simplest way possible, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved..."

PROBLEM NO. 17 --THAT THE NATION OF ISRAEL REJECTED THE OFFER OF THE KINGDOM IN MATTHEW, CHAPTER 11
This is the teaching in the Scofield Bible (1917 Edition) in its notes on page 1011, and by the new Scofield Bible in the New King James Version, on pages 1141-1142 (1989 Edition). Both Bibles state that the Kingdom of heaven was morally rejected by Israel. The note goes on to say that the official rejection was later (Matt. 27:21-25).
J. Sidlow Baxter, in his The Strategic Grasp of the Bible, says on page 246 that Matt. 11:20 is the key verse in that chapter.

THE TRUTH
What was really rejected by the Nation of Israel was their KING, the Lord Jesus Christ. They nailed HIM to the cross, hoping to get rid of Him once and for all.
Actually, there was no offer of the Millennial Kingdom of heaven during our Lord's earthly ministry. The Kingdom could not have been offered until the prophecies of Christ's death were fulfilled (Understanding the Book of Acts by Charles F. Baker, page 30; Grace Bible College Publ.; 1981). Our Lord had said in Luke 17:25, "But first He must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation." What was rejected? The Person of Christ the Messiah and not the Kingdom. We also read in Luke 24:26, "Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?" Peter repeats this very same truth in his first letter, 1 Peter 1:11, referring to the Old Testament prophets testifying through the Spirit of the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.
The Kingdom was only 'at hand' (Matt. 3:2), not offered as such. In other words, the people of Israel were told that the Kingdom was near and they were to get ready for it through repentance and baptism. That was the only way they could see the Kingdom of God and enter into this Kingdom promised in the Old Testament (John 3:3,5).
The one and only offer of the Kingdom was the subject of Peter's second sermon on the Day of Pentecost. This is stated in Acts 3:19-21, "Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord [20] and that He may send Jesus Christ who was preached to you before, [211 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began."
The Kingdom is seen in the phrases 'times of refreshing' and 'restoration of, all things.' This is not to be spiritualized into something else but to be taken in a literal sense just as the Old Testament prophets understood it (Isa. 2:1-4; 11:6-9; Micah 4:1-3). If Israel had repented, then the Lord Jesus Christ would have come back at the proper time.

PROBLEM NO. 18 --THEY DO NOT RECOGNIZE THE POSITIVE ANSWER TO THE LORD'S PRAYER WHILE ON THE CROSS
This prayer is found in Luke 23:34, "Then Jesus said, Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do. And they divided His garments and cast lots."
This was the first of the seven sayings of our Lord while He was hanging on the cross, and it was a prayer for forgiveness. Acts 2 brethren do not see any significance to the answer of this prayer.

PROBLEM NO. 19 --THE BELIEF THAT THE CHURCH, THE BODY OF CHRIST, WILL COME BACK WITH CHRIST AT THE SECOND COMING IN ORDER TO REIGN AND LIVE WITH HIM ON EARTH

THE TRUTH
Just 'who' or 'what' will come back with Christ at His Second Advent? Is it both 'angels' and 'saved people,' or just 'saved people,' or just 'angels?'
The overwhelming testimony of Scripture is that angels come with the Lord at His Second Coming instead of saved people. The Old Testament saints who go into the Millennium will be RESURRECTED rather than coming back with Christ (Rev. 20:4-5). Everyone will be accounted for by God.
The future that God has planned for the Body of Christ is ' far greater than ruling on earth for 1000 years. And besides, who would want to come back to an earth where sin will still be manifested?
The Millennium should have no attraction for the one who has a resurrection body of glory. We are going to reign with Him inthe Fourth Dimension, but not on earth (2 Tim. 2:12; 1 Cor. 6:3).

PROBLEM No. 20 --THAT ANGELS HAVE A MINISTRY TO THE BODY OF CHRIST DURING THE DISPENSATION OF GRACE

PROBLEM NO. 21 --THAT THE GIFT OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES IS FOR THE CHURCH TODAY
Those who insist that the gift of speaking in tongues is for the Church are mainly Acts 2 brethren in their doctrine. All of the charismatics that I have had anything to do with were Acts 2 believers. They teach that what happened on the Day of Pentecost is normal for the Church. Since the Body of Christ began on that Day, speaking in tongues should be exercised by believers.
They go to 1 Cor. 14:39 to back up their claim for practicing this gift: "Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues." They also teach that the gift experienced by the Corinthians was different than what was exercised on the Day of Pentecost.
I am not aware of any charismatics who follow Covenant Theology, even though I would not be surprised if there were some. The Charismatic movement has penetrated most, if not all, Protestant denominations. However, the majority of charismatics believe that the Church began in Acts 2.

THE TRUTH
The doctrine of 'progressive revelation' from God in the Bible supplies the evidence to indicate that this particular gift of the Spirit was only temporary in nature.
What is the 'perfect thing?' It is the BIBLE, THE WORD OF GOD. The Bible is the only tangible perfect thing in our world today.
The teaching of this verse is that when the Bible is completed and finishe by the Holy Spirit working through Paul (Col. 1:25 - To COMPLETE THE WORD OF GOD), then the sign gifts (that which is 'in part') would cease. The Bible
was completed around 67 AD with the letter of 2 Timothy. The close of Acts took place around 62-63 AD. So in the sixties of the first century, Israel's sign gifts ceased to function when God's Word was completed. There was no
more need for them.
3. The last letter Paul wrote during the Acts period was Romans. In the list of 'gifts' to the Church in Romans 12, the gift of speaking in tongues is left out while the gift of prophecy was included (Rom. 12:3-8, but especially verse 6). As a matter of fact, other gifts were left out, too. And this was done on purpose, to indicate that Israel's sign gifts were to be done away with.
4. The last list of gifts is found in Ephesians 4:11: "And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers Ephesians is often regarded as a 'prison epistle' because it was written by Paul while he was in prison in Rome for two years. Ephesians is also considered as being written shortly after the events of Acts 28, and therefore, sets the standard of truth for the rest of this Dispensation of grace.
Apostles and prophets have passed off the scene. God made no provision for continuing them. But the gifts of evangelism, pastoring and teaching, plus some others from Romans 12, are to be exercised in the Body of Christ today. See my book on the 'Ministry of the Holy Spirit During this Present Dispensation of grace.'

PROBLEM NO. 22 - THAT THE LAW OF MOSES WAS SET ASIDE AT THE TIME OF THE CROSS
This belief is set forth in Lewis Sperry Chafer's 'Systematic Theology,' Vol. 7, page 225, where he states, 11... But the entire system, including the commandments as a rule of life, ceased with the death of Christ (John 1:17; Rom. 10:4)." In Vol. 4, pages 164-165 and 234-243, he went into greater detail concerning this viewpoint.

THE TRUTH
The abolishing of the Law of Moses is one of the great accomplishments of the cross. The cross pronounced judgment on the Mosaic Law, which came at Acts 28 because of Israel's unbelief. Christ fulfilled this Law in every respect, including His death as a sacrifice for sin (Matt. 5:17-18; Heb. 9:11-14,26; Romans 10:4).
The truth that the cross was the agent by which the Law of Moses was abolished or done away with was revealed only to Paul. Peter, James, John and Jude said NOTHING about this aspect of the cross.
There are 5 proofs in the book of Acts that the Law of Moses did not cease at the time of the cross. They are:
1. The Day of Pentecost itself. It was a vital part of the Law (Lev. 23:15-22).
2. The miracles and signs of Acts 2:43; 3:7-8, which was a part of the commission of the 12 Apostles.
3. The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5 was according to the Law of Moses (Ex. 20:15-16; Joshua 7:11).
4. There were many 'priests' in Jerusalem who carried out the duties of the Iaw (Acts 6:7).
5. Many thousands of Jewish believers were zealous of the Law of Moses as late as Acts 21:20. They were not reprimanded by James about their beliefs in Judaism.

PROBLEM NO. 23 --THAT JESUS TAUGHT DURING HIS EARTHLY MINISTRY THAT BELIEVERS IN HIM WOULD GO TO HEAVEN WHEN THEY DIED
John, chapter 3, is usually given as the basis for this misleading idea. The Gospel of John is supposed to be very different from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. The theology of John and Paul are supposed to be the same; that is, they are to supplement each other. John, chapter 3, is supposed to present the Gospel of the grace of God. The 'Kingdom of God' in John 3:3,5 is supposed to be spiritual' and stands for 'heaven' itself.

THE TRUTH
The third chapter of John is probably the most familiar chapter in the Bible. This is due to the evangelists who preach repeatedly from this portion of Scripture and preach salvation for today out of it.
The Apostle Paul is the only writer in the Bible who can direct us to heaven. His Gospel, which is called 'my Gospel' three times in the New Testament (Rom. 2:16; 16:25; 2 Tim. 2:8) is the ONLY MESSAGE FROM GOD that prepares sinners for heaven. My friend, I hope you have believed it in your heart (Rom. 10:9-10).

PROBLEM NO. 24 --THAT THE OTHER GOSPEL IN GALATIANS 1:6 IS EITHER A FALSE GOSPEL OR A MIXTURE OF LAW AND GRACE
Acts 2 theologians are undecided as to what to call the 'other' gospel in the Galatians passage. Their doctrinal allegiance with Covenant theology on the 'one gospel' theory forces the Acts 2 teacher to invent the phrase 'false gospel,' which Kenneth S. Wuest teaches in his 'Galatians in the Greek New Testament,' page 37. But the majority of Acts 2 teachers believe that the 'other' gospel is a mixture of Law and Grace, which is the viewpoint of the Old and New Scofield Bibles in their notes on Gal. 1:6 and on Rev. 14:6. To them the 'different' gospel is a perversion of the Gospel of the grace of God, something that law can do when it is mixed with the Grace of God.

THE TRUTH
This was briefly mentioned on page 3, under Problem no. 1. More needs to be said because this is a major belief in Acts 2 Dispensationalism.
Now it is strange that ALL will admit that it was the JUDAIZERS who tried to get the Galatian believers away from the Gospel of Christ. Where did the Judaizers come from? What did they believe in? Did they preach Gnosticism or Greek mythology
or Roman mythology to the Galatians?
The Judaizers were from Israel; they were not Gentiles. Everybody is agreed on this, too. They tried to get Gentile believers to adopt Jewish customs and beliefs. whether saved or unsaved, they knew about the Gospel of the Kingdom that was preached around Palestine by the 12 Apostles of Israel. This Gospel was a valid gospel message at the time of the book of Acts and the Apostle Paul. Jesus preached THAT Gospel for over 3 years, and the Apostles preached it much longer than that. The Gospel of the Kingdom did not cease with the death and resurrection of Christ, but was preached in all of its power by Peter on the Day of Pentecost.

PROBLEM NO. 25 - THAT WE ARE TO FOLLOW JESUS ACCORDING TO HIS EARTHLY MINISTRY

PROBLEM NO. 26 - THAT BELIEVERS ARE TO CONFESS THEIR SINS TO GOD
The passage for this is 1 John 1:6-2:1, especially verse 9, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." The New Scofield Bible, NKJV, relates this passage (and the whole letter of 1 John) to Christians whose sins have broken fellowship with God (page 1514).

THE TRUTH
Paul says nothing about confessing our sins to God or to anyone else, for that matter.

PROBLEM NO. 27 --THAT OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY IS BEING FULFILLED DURING THESE LAST DAYS OF THE DISPENSATION OF THE GRACE OF GOD
Much preaching today by prophetic experts, mainly of the Acts 2 persuasion, teach that Old Testament prophecy related to the Land of Palestine is being partially fulfilled today before the Rapture takes place. The reason for this is to have the land prepared for the Tribulation Period when it comes. They teach that when Israel became a nation in 1948, this event fulfilled prophecy. In addition, they believe that the mysteries of the Kingdom of heaven of Matthew 13 are being fulfilled during this Age of grace. This is the view of the New Scofield Study Bible, NKTV, on pages 1145-1149 in its notes on Matt. 13.

THE TRUTH
They teach this because they believe that when Israel became a nation in 1948, it was a fulfillment of prophecy. THIS IS TOTALLY WRONG. Old Testament prophecy was NOT fulfilled in 1948. How do I know this? Because Israel as a nation MUST REPENT FIRST, and this did not take place in 1948.

PROBLEM NO. 28--THAT ALL CHRISTIANS ARE COMMANDED TO TITHE ACCORDING TO MALACHI 3:8-10
Tithing is seen to be the God-given way of supporting the Christian ministry today. According to Dake's Annotated Reference Bible, he believed that Paul taught this doctrine in Gal. 6:6; 1 Cor. 9:7-14; 16:2, and in 1 Tim. 6:17-18. He even stated that "no Scripture even mentions a substitute program for tithing in the New Testament" (page 270).
Jesus referred to tithing in Matt. 23:23 and in Luke 18:12.

THE TRUTH
One has to admit that the 'tithe' is an excellent way to raise money for church work, even though it is a principle that belongs to Israel alone, and is not for today. It is a sure way of getting at least 10% from misguided believers.
However, it seems that believers are being short-changed by those in the pulpit. Believers give millions of dollars yearly for the Lord's work, and what they get in return urn from the pulpit is basically the ABC's of the Bible - milk and pabulum (baby food - Hebrews 5:11-14). They are taught more Jewish doctrine than Christian doctrine; they are taught how to wrongly divide the Word instead of being taught how to rightly divide the Word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15). In the final analysis, the Law of Moses has a strangle hold on the Body of Christ, because the brethren will not search the Scriptures to see if these things are so (Acts 17:11).

CONCLUSION
Over half of the 28 problems are also found in Covenant Theology. Covenant Theology and Acts 2 Theology have more in common than believers realize. The inconsistencies in the Acts 2 position opens the door for Covenant scholars to severely criticize them. You see, they are like 'brother' and 'sister' in a family. Everyone knows how brothers and sisters fight, or for that matter, how brothers fight with each other. And so it is when it comes to the two main systems of theology in Protestantism.
When believers are confronted with the problems outlined here, they merely shrug them off as being unnecessary to salvation, and therefore, not important. After all, being saved by faith in Christ alone is what is important. Everything else is secondary and we shouldn't fight over secondary things. This is the way most Christians think.

APPENDIX A
THE BEGINNING OF THE BODY OF CHRIST, THE CHURCH


What does lightninboy think of this article?
It offers much food for thought, but it denied salvation by grace through faith plus nothing in PROBLEM NO. 2.

 

[lightninboy]

http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/hyperdispensationalism.html

Hyper-Dispensationalism
by Brother Ruckman

In this study I am going to discuss a fundamental heresy called ultra-dispensationalism or hyper-dispensationalism. The thing I am about to talk about is as much a "heresy" as the teaching of John Calvin on sprinkling babies or as much a heresy as the teaching of the Seventh-day Adventists or the Jehovah's Witnesses.

This is very important because it shows that the Book of Acts is a transitional period that takes us from the Old Testament to the New Testament. For this reason some of the greatest heretics who ever lived base their teaching on the Book of Acts. For example, there is not a Church of Christ preacher in the United States who doesn't base his entire system on Acts 2:38. And Calvin can be found fooling around in the Book of Acts where we read in Acts 13:48, "...as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." That isn't all. Every Postmillennial preacher in the world can be found in Acts 2 where he will be found insisting that the Lord Jesus Christ is now on David's throne reigning over David's kingdom. The Book of Acts, then, is a dangerous place for anybody to rest doctrinally, and just as the Campbellite or Church of Christ preacher rests on his water baptism for salvation, so the ultra-dispensationalists get rid of water baptism altogether and make as much an issue of it as the Church of Christ preachers do.

I am going to talk about these things from personal experience, having dealt firsthand with several dozen of these people in several different states under all kinds of conditions.

The first statement is that the man who subscribes to hyperdispensationalism is as hung up on non-baptism as any Campbellite preacher who ever lived is hung up on water baptism. As a matter of fact, the more you watch these people through the years the more you realize that they have a neurotic obsession with this phase of their Bible learning. The all-important thing to the hyper-dispensationalist is to get rid of Baptist churches. These people are obsessed with this to the point of fanaticism, and that won't be hard to prove as we go along.

My second statement is that the hyper-dispensationalist, exactly as the Campbellite, Seventh-day Adventist and Jehovah's Witness, has had to, from time to time, adjust his theology to meet the demands of scripture.

And so, when talking about "hyper-dispensationalism," at the very start I am going to tell you what these people believe. They will then deny everything I say they believe and produce the scriptures for their "circular reasoning." While they get through after six hours, you will find that they believe exactly what I told you they believe. All heretics have what we call "circular reasoning." It is a reasoning that begins with one verse and runs to another and runs to another and runs to another to complete a circle to get across something that is not true. You just try "cornering" one of these fellows one time on one verse and you will find that fellow will fly like the wind to the next verse. This is characteristic of all Campbellite preachers, all Jehovah's Witnesses, all Seventh-day Adventists, and it is very very true of hyper-Calvinists.

What is a hyper-dispensationalist? Well, the original position was stated by a man named Ethelbert Bullinger, who lived back in the nineteenth century and wrote The Companion Bible. Bullinger taught this: (1) That only the prison epistles written by Paul after the close of the Book of Acts could be considered as doctrine for the Christian; (2) That the Body found in the Book of Acts is not the Body of Christ mentioned in Ephesians 2 and 3; and (3) That the "mystery Body" Paul mentions in Ephesians 2 and 3 did not show up until after the close of Acts 28. With this, Bullinger got fouled up on the prepositions in Ephesians 1 about "all things" being in Christ and finally wound up proposing universal salvation for everybody, including the devil. Strangely enough, Ephesians 1 contains the proof text for hyper-Calvinism. So, we can learn something. We can learn that Ephesians 1 is a very dangerous place to be fooling around in if you are unlearned and unstable. Both hyper-Calvinism and hyper-dispensationalism have their foundation in the Book of Ephesians and both of them use references to verses in the Book of Acts to prove their particular position.

The position changes a bit under J. C. O'Hare (the radio preacher out of Chicago). He backslid from Bullinger's position because of a number of things. First of all was the very embarrassing (and very obvious) thing which was pointed out to him by some Bible-believing Baptist that 1 Corinthians 12 is already dealing with the "mystery Body" and the members in the Body, and it says clearly "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body...." This epistle was written during the Acts period to converts of the Corinthian church. So, O'Hare backslid and decided that the Body of Christ began in Acts 18. Acts 18 was dealing with the Corinthian church and this "saved face" for the dispensationalists temporarily because they had the "Body of Christ" beginning in Acts 18 during the Acts period and yet they still could dump the water baptism. The last cases they found of water baptism in the Book of Acts were in Acts 18 and 19 and, by dispensationally treating the passage in Acts 19 that dealt with the baptism of Apollos' converts (vv. 1-7), they could say that water baptism ended in Acts 18; therefore, the Body of Chist began in Acts 18.

This is typical of the heretic who doesn't know what he is talking about. He makes his direct statement and then has to adjust and readjust and readjust to meet the demands of the scripture. We are dealing with a bunch of people who are devoted to getting rid of water baptism in any form. Because of this, the fundamental, Bible-believing Baptist churches have as their worst theological opponents in this age the dispensationalists who follow the teaching of J. C. O'Hare, Baker, Cornelius Stam and Bullinger.

Continuing with the history of the matter, it was called to the attention of J.C. O'Hare the remarkable verse (which is perfectly apparent to anybody) in Acts 16 which states that the apostle Paul baptized converts after he knew about the "gospel of the grace of God." As a matter of fact, it is perfectly clear from Acts 15 that the "gospel of the grace of God" was known to all the apostles, for Simon Peter in Acts 15 says in verse 11, "But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they." And plainly when the Philippian jailer asked, "...What must I do to be saved?" in Acts 16, Paul does not tell him to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. But rather he tells him, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved...." This is the teaching of Ephesians and Romans. So, it is perfectly apparent that in Acts 16, even though Paul knew the "gospel of the grace of God," he still baptized the convert after getting him saved by grace through faith. After this was called to J. C. O'Hare's attention, Cornelius Stam and Baker took a step back further to Acts 9.

Now this group is teaching that the "Body" began with Paul. This makes the Body of Christ from Acts 2 to Acts 9 one Body and the Body of Christ from Acts 9 on a different Body. But, again, this got very embarrassing, for it was then called to their attention (and that is all I'm going to do with this booklet, just call it constantly to your attention so that you will wind up a Bible-believer instead of a hyper-dispensationalist) that some of Paul's kinfolk were "in Christ" before Acts 9. Notice the clearest statement of Paul about these matters in Romans 16. In Romans 16:7 he says, "Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me." This drove the dispensationalists up a tree so they finally came to the conclusion that you could be "in Christ" without being in Christ's Body (which is a very unique position to say the least).

The expression "in Christ" is a Pauline expression that deals with the "mystery" of the Body. Yet these people could not allow anybody to be "in Christ" before Paul (Acts 9) even though Paul says, "...who also were in Christ before me." So, because of this, the last adjustment these hypocrites have made has been to say that the Body of Christ was in the mind of God before Acts 9 but was not in reality until after it was revealed to Paul. By doing this, they have switched back to Bullinger's old position and have gotten away with it by saying that the Body did not actually begin with Paul but that sometime in the Book of Acts there was a gradual transition to the Body as the mystery was revealed. This is the baloney you are going to get from the followers today and, for this reason, we are going to make "short shrift" of them and pin the thing right down. We are going to get our hand right on the issue.

The issue is: When did the "Body" start? That is the issue and there is no ducking it. It is true that these hypocrites will run to some other verses to prove the "mystery of the revelation" in order to sidetrack you from locating when the Body started. But the issue has always been when did the Body start. And these people do not want you to know that because (1) they don't know it themselves, (2) they move it to whatever position is convenient for them, (3) they want it anywhere that excludes water baptism. That is the teaching. The people who propagate this now are Cornelius Stam and Baker, who publish the Berean Searchlight and several commentaries. Although these people have some sound thoughts about the difference between the Petrine ministry and Pauline ministry, when it comes to dispensational truth none of them could tell you when this dispensation started if their life depended upon it. I'll give you a sample of the conversation I have had with eight of them on eight different occasions through a period of twenty years. The conversations run like this:

"Brother Ruckman, can you show me one verse in the Bible that commands us to be baptized in water?"

Yes, I can.

"Where?"

Matthew 28:19, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

"Brother Ruckman, doctrinally that refers to the Tribulation."

Well sure, it may refer dispensationally to the Tribulation, but some things that refer to the Tribulation can refer to the church age.

"For example, what?"

I'll give you a good example. Revelation 12 says, "They overcame" the devil "by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death." That's as good a "church age doctrine" as you ever found in all your life.

"Yes, but you know this can't be dispensationally true here because in the Book of Acts they didn't baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. They baptized in the name of Jesus."

No, you missed a statement in Acts 10 where they were baptized in the name of the Lord.

"Well, that was the name of Jesus."

No, you missed it again. Matthew 28 says to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Cornelius in Acts 10 was a Gentile.

"Well, Brother Ruckman, can you give a verse in the Pauline epistles that commands water baptism?"

Why, sure.

"What?"

First Corinthians 11:1, "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."

"Now, Brother Ruckman, you know that Paul's baptism in the Book of Acts was a Jewish proselyte baptism of Ananias and you shouldn't follow that."

No, you're wrong. I'm not told to follow the guy that baptized Paul. I'm told to follow Paul. We should follow Paul's practice. Paul was baptized.

"But under a different dispensation in Acts 9."

Oh, I don't know about that. He is baptizing his converts in Acts 16. Someone is in trouble.

So, when these fellows come in, they always come in like that. And finally they will come out and say, "Well, Brother Ruckman, we just don't believe water baptism is for the church age." And when they say that, you ask them when this age started and I'll bet you a dollar to a doughnut that fellow will talk fifteen minutes without saying anything after you ask him that question. He will quote Ephesians 2. He will quote Ephesians 3. He will run around in the Book of Acts. He will run over to Romans. He will spend that time demonstrating his great proficiency in the scriptures, but there is something he will not tell you. He will not tell you when the church age started. I said to one of these fellows one time, "When did this age start?" After forty minutes he admitted that he didn't know. And I said, "Well, you crazy fool, what are you doing telling my people that water baptism is not for this age when you don't even know when this age started?" That is like a man saying the animals couldn't get in the ark because the ark was too small and you ask the man how big the ark was and the fool doesn't even know. That is the kind of thing you are dealing with when you are dealing with a hyper-dispensationalist. And if you want to pin the man right down, you pin him down with where did the Body of Christ start.

The next problem we have with these track runners is that if you ever convince them that the "Body" starts in Acts 2, they will say, "Then we have to have tongues like Acts 2. We have to share our property like Acts 2. Why don't we follow Acts 2 practice?" The answer to that is very simple. We don't follow Acts 2 practice because in Acts 2 when the events took place we had not had the full revelation and Simon Peter, who speaks, doesn't know what is going on doctrinally. That is the answer to that. There is no indication that Simon Peter knows all the truths of the New Testament in Acts 2 when he preaches. He is going by the light he has and with the light he has he is pointing to the truth. He is speaking just to Israel. He is preaching that you have to be baptized in water to receive the Holy Ghost. And, of course, in that case it is true. Later it is not true. You say, "How do you know that later it is not?" Because we are plainly told in Acts 10 that while Simon Peter was preaching "...the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word." They didn't have to get baptized to get the Holy Ghost. They got the Holy Ghost before they were baptized. That is why the Church of Christ preacher will never read the Book of Acts. You will find him stopped in Acts 2 every time and subjecting the whole Bible to Acts 2, because in Acts 10 they didn't have to be baptized in water to receive the Holy Ghost.

I am going to take you through Ephesians 2 and 3 and show you the foundation texts for hyper-dispensationalism, and then we will see if they have any validity or bearing upon the truth. In Ephesians 3 I am going to read this thing exactly as Cornelius Stam and Bullinger read it. They read it that a "thing cannot be revealed until it is present" and that if a thing is not revealed it is not there. They all vehemently deny this and yet, having dealt with these fellows through a period of years, I can tell you that there is not one of them who believes a thing can be there unless it is revealed. That will not be hard to prove in a minute.

Now I am going to read it like Stam reads it. "For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, If ye have heard of the age of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward" (Eph. 3:1, 2). So, they make one age the "Dispensation of Grace," you see? And, of course, that isn't the sentence at all. He is talking about God dispensing grace to Paul. Do you see "If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward." He is not talking about a period of time where grace is operative. Why, the Bible says that "Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord." Noah is in a dispensation of grace, if you go to divide them up. "How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed (when it took place) unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given to me..." (Eph. 3:3-7). See how that matches verse 2? "...Given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given..." (vv. 7, 8). There it goes again. See?

Three times you are told that the dispensation was the handing out of grace to Paul. It had nothing to do with any period of time. "...That I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God." The trouble with this reading is that somebody is confounding when the thing took place with the time it was revealed. That isn't all. Paul was writing this to the Ephesians and he was dealing with the Ephesians back in the Book of Acts in chapter 19 and chapter 20, and at this time he already knows the mystery. That isn't the worst of it. The worst of it is that 1 Corinthians (written about this time) also speaks of the "mystery" in 1 Corinthians 12. Paul knew about the mystery before Acts 18. Therefore we should never confound the revelation of the mystery with when the thing took place.

Of course, that is the basic error in all the writings of Cornelius Stam and Baker and O'Hare and the men who follow them. There are many of these followers now in every city who take the Berean Searchlight. I know many of these men by name. They all have the same operation. They will travel hundreds of miles to meet together and tear up Baptist doctrine and they like to slip into Baptist churches as "Bible teachers" or "students" to take people out and form new groups and then they begin to fight among themselves and break up and start other groups. That is the history of this movement. This movement is an apostate movement exactly like Seventh-day Adventism or any cult or heresy.

I've talked to scores of them. They never recover. Once they get hung they are hung up.

We Bible-believing Baptists have taught two things for many years. We have taught that the local church did not begin at Pentecost. This is perfectly clear in the passage in Matthew 16 and 18, the calling out of the twelve, and in the commissioning of this local church in Matthew 28 and Acts 1. This group has a roll of 120 names on it n Acts 1. It had a treasurer who died and was replaced in Acts 1 and Matthew 26. It had a leader who was spokesman for the group, Simon Peter, Acts 1 and 2. It was a local, called out assembly, called out and chosen by the Lord. As such, it was a Jewish church. It certainly had Jews and Gentiles in it after Pentecost. This local church became an organism. It became more than an organization at Pentecost. It became a living organism, and its members were placed in Christ by a baptism of the Holy Spirit. When Paul says, "...one Spirit...one Lord, one faith, one baptism," he can only refer to the same Holy Spirit and to the same baptism that put the Pentecostal disciples, Cornelius' family, the apostle Paul himself and the Ephesians into the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13).

At this point the roar goes up from the bleachers and these poor deluded fools pipe up with, "This can't be because the same phenomena didn't happen." The answer to that is ppphhhuuuutt! That is the answer to that. The Lord has all kinds of phenomena. He can do it any way He wants to. Throughout the Book of Acts He changes a dozen times. In the Book of Acts one bunch of people have to be baptized to get the Holy Ghost, Acts 2; another group gets the Holy Ghost before they are baptized, Acts 10; another man is born again before he is baptized in water, Acts 9; another bunch of people believe and are saved and are baptized without receiving the Holy Ghost, Acts 8; another bunch of people get saved and get baptized and don't talk in tongues until hands are laid on them, Acts 19. For you to say that the Body of Christ couldn't "be there" because the "phenomena" varies is the utmost of something or other when Paul said that there is one baptism, one body and one Spirit. You can't get a Body other than Christ's Body from Acts 2 to Acts 9. That would make two bodies.

This brings up a point now that is going to blow the whole system to pieces. The point is this. Were Peter, James and John in "the Body"? Now that is the crux. If you want to mess up Stam, Baker and O'Hare to where they will never get back on their feet again, you ask them if Peter, James and John were in the Body of Christ and, if so, when did they get in?

This is the difference between a Bible-believing Baptist and a Bible-rejecting ultra-dispensationalist. The Bible-believing Baptist believes that Jesus meant what He said and said what He meant; that He was in Peter, James and John; that Peter, James and John were in Him; that this high priestly prayer was answered and that the only place it could have been answered was at Pentecost.

But, that isn't the worst of it. Go back to Ephesians 2 and look at verse 11 and notice that when Paul is discussing the household of God and the habitation, the foundation of the building, he was making reference to the Body of Christ. Ephesians 2:11-15, "Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at the time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by" What? "the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who..." (Past tense--not when he got the Body mystery. Not when the mystery was revealed in the late Acts period. Past tense) "having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments...." When did He do this? Verse 16, when He died on the cross, "And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross...." Now, there is the matter. And all this nonsense about "there weren't any Gentiles in Acts 1, 2 and 3 so there couldn't be any Body there because the Body is a joint Body" is just a lot of hot air. The fact the Gentiles didn't enter that Body until they got saved in Acts 10 and in Acts 8 (the Ethiopian eunuch) and the fact that pure Gentiles who weren't Jewish proselytes didn't get into that Body until Acts 13, 14, 15 and 16 does not amount to a hill of beans. The way was made for them to get in there when Jesus Christ died on the cross, verse 16. And it was preached "to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh." It got preached first at Jerusalem to a bunch of Jews and then to those afar off, the Gentiles, "For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father."

Paul told you that the one Spirit that gave the Ephesian Gentile mystery Body people access to the Father gave the Jewish Pentecostal apostles access to the Father following the crucifixion. And there it is. You can't get around that thing if you stay up all night with a Bullingerite.

They are bloodsuckers and leeches and I don't know of a case (of all I've known in many years of the ministry) who ever got his own church going. Every one of their churches is made up of members of other churches. Cornelius Stam has gone so far as to say that the Ethiopian eunuch who got saved by reading Isaiah 53 was not trusting the shed blood and points out to the student that Isaiah 53 is talking about Christ dying for Israel, not Ethiopian eunuchs. To which may be answered an emphatic "ppphhhhhuuuutt!" There is nothing to that type of Bible exegesis.

The truth of the matter is that the Body of Christ was formed with the death of Christ, exactly as Adam had his body formed when he slept the sleep of death and Eve was taken from his side. The fact that the Body did not begin to be built until Pentecost means absolutely nothing. The fact that that Body at first contained Jews only means absolutely nothing. It was destined to have Jews and Gentiles in it and this is the mystery that was revealed to Paul after Acts 9. The fact that it was revealed to Paul after Acts 8 has no bearing upon when it started at all. It was there years before Paul was saved. His kinsmen were "in Christ" before he was in Chist. He persecuted Christ in the person of the saints in Acts 7 and 8 because they were part of the Body of Christ. This Body is called the church of God in Galatians 1:13, and you are told in 1 Corinthians 10, 11 and 12 that the church of God is composed of Jew and Gentile (1 Cor. 12:13).

What has this got to do with water baptism? Just this. Even if John the Baptist's water baptism was to manifest Christ to Israel, which it was, even if Simon Peter's water baptism "for repentance" was so that God could give the Holy Spirit to Israel, even though the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch was after he was saved by grace through faith, and even though the baptism of Paul was for purification of sin, the salient fact remains that the Author and Finisher of our faith, the Lord Jesus Christ, was baptized in water, the eleven apostles who followed Him and wrote part of your New Testament were baptized in water, and Paul was baptized in water and baptized some of his converts in water. And there is no way out of these great palin truths. I don't care how swift and smooth and witty and adept you are in judging the scriptures and wresting the scriptures, you cannot beat those three great salient truths. The apostle who said, "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ," submitted to water baptism. And when Paul told a man how to get saved by grace through faith in Acts 16, he let him follow the Lord in baptism. And although Paul was not sent primarily to baptize, he did baptize. And although he may not have given a clear commandment in the Pauline epistles on the relation of water baptism to the Body of Christ, he certainly left the matter open and certainly set the example himself and certainly never repented of his own baptism or told anybody to repent of theirs. "All unrighteousness is sin." And if it is not right to get baptized in water, water baptism is a sin and I don't recall one place in the Pauline epistles where Paul ever confessed that "sin." However, I can turn you to five other places where he confessed a dozen sins he committed before he was saved. In his reat statement after he was saved he said, "...Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief." In his great confession of sin as a Christian in Romans 7, Paul never mentioned water baptism one time. Paul followed the Lord in baptism and rested in it content. He only taught that there was one saving baptism, that was the Holy Spirit, and that the same Spirit that put people into the Body of Christ in Acts 2 put them into the Body of Christ in Acts 8, 9, 10, 16, 18, 28 and up until the rapture of the Body of the Lord Jesus Christ. We Bible-believing Baptists don't make too much of an issue out of it because we believe that a man is saved by grace through faith and that baptism is only a figure of salvation, 1 Peter 3:21. But people who follow Cornelius Stam and the ultra-dispensationalists will always make an issue out of it. The only theme song they have is "How dry I am, how dry I am," and their teaching and preaching is as dry as their baptism.

WHAT HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISTS TEACH

1. There is a period of time called "THE GRACE OF GOD" which began in Acts 9 (Stam, Baker, Moore, Natkins) or in Acts 18 (O'Hare and others) or in Acts 28 (Bullinger, Ballinger, Greaterex).
2. Water baptism is not for "THIS AGE" since "THIS AGE" began in Acts 9 or Acts 13 or Acts 18 or Acts 28.
3. Bible-believing Baptists are heretics who do not follow "PAULINE" teaching (1 Tim. 1:16).
4. Since Paul did not COMMAND anyone to be baptized, it is UNSCRIPTURAL.
5. Since Paul was not "SENT TO BAPTIZE," water baptism is PRE-PAULINE (1 Cor. 1).
6. The "ONE BAPTISM" of Ephesians 4 automatically cancels water baptism (Moore, Stam, Sharpe, Baker).

THE BIBLE REBUKE OF THE "HYPERS"

1. The "DISPENSATION" of Ephesians 3:2 was the grace which God gave to Paul to preach (Eph. 3:7, 1 Cor. 3:10, Col. 1:29). Grace was "DISPENSED" to him. The "GRACE OF GOD" is found in every period of time (Gen. 6:8, Exod. 33:13).
2. The age of the ONE BODY and the "church of the ONE BODY" began in Matthew 27 (see Eph. 2:12, 16) with twelve apostles "IN CHRIST" (Rom. 16:7) before Paul was saved (John 17:21, 23).
3. Paul was baptized in water (Acts 9:18) and baptized some of his converts (Acts 16:33; 18:8, 1 Cor. 1:14-16), even though he was an evangelist.
4. Paul COMMANDED NO ONE to attend church, pass out tracts, proselyte Baptists who are already saved, or argue about water baptism.
5. He DID baptize (1 Cor. 1:14-16) and only thanked God that people weren't baptized in his name (1 Cor. 1:14-18). Paul was not sent by Mark 16:16-18 but he is the only apostle who fulfilled that commission.
6. The Corinthian converts who were baptized by ONE Spirit into ONE Body (1 Cor. 12:13) were baptized in water (Acts 18:8).

THE HYPER-DISPENSATIONALIST'S PERVERSION OF EPHESIANS 4:5

1. Stam, Baker, Bullinger, Ballinger and Moore all take Ephesians 4:4-5 out of the context in which it appears (as any Campbellite will also do) and pretend that it is talking about WATER BAPTISM being replaced by spirit baptism. This explains why 95 percent of any "Hyper" CONGREGATION are ex-Baptists.

2. The context of Ephesians 4:4-6 is the unity of the Body of Christ, not "DISUNITY" caused by carnal Christians who say: "I AM OF CHRIST" (1 Cor. 1:12).

3. The same baptism that put Paul into Christ ("WE," 1 Cor. 12:13) put Gentile believers (Corinth, Ephesus) into Christ.

4. The same baptism that put "THE TWELVE" into Christ (Acts 1:5) put the Roman converts into Christ (Rom. 6:1-3; 16:7).

ONE BAPTISM

Hypers teach two or three baptisms of the Spirit, although the context of ONE BAPTISM is ONE SPIRIT (Eph. 4:4, 5).

There are seven baptisms (Matt. 3:11; 28:11-20, Acts 2:38, Matt. 20:22, 1 Cor. 10:1-3, Eph. 4:4).

There are MANY lords and gods (1 Cor. 8:5) (note: Eph. 4:5- 6).

FALSE TEACHINGS OF HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISTS

1. PETER AND PAUL PREACHED "DIFFERENT" GOSPELS. If they did then Peter was cursed (Gal. 1:8-9). God taught Peter the Gospel in Acts 10:43, which he publicly acknowledges in Acts 15:11, while ALL ARE PRACTICING WATER BAPTISM.

2. REPENTANCE SHOULD NOT BE PREACHED IN THIS AGE. Paul preached it constantly (Acts 20:21) and asked exactly what John the Baptist asked for when he preached it (Acts 26:20). Paul did this after writing Romans 16:25-26.

3. THE "BODY" COULD NOT HAVE BEEN AT PENTECOST BECAUSE NO ONE MENTIONED IT. Neither did any one mention the complete abolition of the Law (Levitical) or the fulfilling of the Law (Acts 13:38-40) though both (Col. 2:14-16) were accomplished FACTS (Gal. 3:13).

4. MATTHEW 28:19-20 IS LIMITED TO THE TRIBULATION. Pure conjecture (see 1 Tim. 6:3, written to saints in "THE ONE BODY"). The "ALL THINGS" of Matthew 28:20 does not include all PRECRUCIFIXION instruction, which is apparent to anyone by comparing Matthew 10:1-10 with Matthew 28:19-20 and John 13-17.
The Tribulation had NOT begun in 33 A.D. Note: "UNTO THE END OF THE WORLD."

5. PAUL WAS DECEIVED ABOUT WATER BAPTISM AND THE "ONE BODY" UNTIL HE WROTE EPHESIANS 3-4 (after Acts 28).

Then he sinned against God in not confessing it.

He sinned against YOU in not telling you straight out in plain clear-cut commands (note: 1 Thess. 5 and Rom. 14) not to make the same mistake.

Every Christian leader in the New Testament was baptized in water: none of them "REPENTED" of such an action.


http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/

 

[lightninboy]

http://www.krowtracts.com/ultra.html

Just One Gospel
A Look At Ultra-dispensationalism

by Don Krow

I want to discuss dispensations, covenant theology and ultra-dispensationalism. First of all I quote from appendix 2 of the book "Faith Works," "Many people are understandably confused by the term DISPENSATIONALISM. I've met seminary graduates and many in Christian leadership who haven't the slightest idea how to define dispensationalism. How does it differ from covenant theology?" (Faith Works, by John MacArthur Jr., p. 219).

"Covenant theology, on the other hand, usually views such prophecies as ALREADY fulfilled allegorically (i.e. in principle) or symbolically. Covenant theologians believe that the church, not literal Israel, is the recipient of the covenant promises. They believe the church has superseded Israel in God's eternal program. God's promises to Israel are therefore fulfilled in spiritual blessings realized by Christians. Since their system does not allow for literal fulfillment of promised blessings to the Jewish nation, covenant theologians allegorize or spiritualize those prophetic passages of God's Word" (Ibid. p. 220).

"I disagree with dispensational extremists who relegate whole sections of Scripture - including the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord's Prayer - to a yet-future kingdom era. I am critical of the way some dispensationalists have handled the preaching and teaching of Jesus in a way that erases the evangelistic intent from some of His most important invitations. I decry the methodology of dispensationalists who want to isolate salvation from repentance, justification from sanctification...in a way that breaks asunder what God has joined together" (Ibid. p. 221).

"Unfortunately some of these early framers of dispensationalism were not as precise or discriminating as they might have been had they had the benefit of a more complete theological education. C.I. Scofield for example, included a note in his reference Bible that contrasted 'legal obedience as the condition of [Old Testament] salvation' with 'acceptance...of Christ' as the condition of salvation in the current dispensation (The Scofield Reference Bible, p. 1115). Non- dispensationalist critics have often attacked dispensationlism for teaching that the conditions for salvation differ from dispensation to dispensation. Here, at least, Scofield left himself open to that criticism, though he seemed to acknowledge in other contexts that the law was never a means of salvation for Old Testament saints" (Ibid., 93).

"Some dispensationalists apply 2 Timothy 2:15 (Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH) as if the key word were DIVIDING rather than RIGHTLY...Some dispensationalists teach, for example, that 'kingdom of heaven' and the 'kingdom of God' speak of different domains. The terms are clearly synonymous in Scripture, however, as a comparison of Matthew and Luke shows (Mt. 5:3//Lk. 6:20; Mt. 10:7//Lk. 10:9;Mt. 11:11//Lk. 7:28; Mt. 11:12//Lk. 16:16; Mt. 13:11//Lk. 8:10; Mt. 13:31-33//Lk. 13:18-21; Mt.18:4//Lk. 18:17; Mt.19:23//Lk.18:24). Matthew is the only book in the entire Bible that ever uses the expression 'kingdom of heaven.' Matthew, writing to a mostly Jewish audience, understood their sensitivity to the use of God's name. He simply employed the common euphemism HEAVEN. Thus the kingdom of heaven is the kingdom of God" (Ibid. p. 226). Other tendencies are to sever justification from sanctification, believers from disciples, etc. Paul was offering a different salvation from Jesus. Abuses of dispensationalism teaches that Jesus' gospel of the kingdom had nothing to do with Christians or the Church age. This philosophy has become a tendency to divide and disconnect related ideas. Grace becomes the basis for antinomianism.

I came from a totally Pauline prospective. The last 20 years of my life have been spent immersed especially in the book of Romans, Galatians and the Pauline epistles. The last couple of years I had to wrestle with my own theology when I was confronted face to face with the words of Jesus. Because I have come from a Pauline prospective, everything that I saw was in a Pauline light. Therefore many of the words that the Lord Jesus would speak meant nothing to me. In fact the way I dealt with Christ's words was to basically ignore them. In the last couple of years I have wondered in my own heart and my own understanding, is there really a distinction between Paul and Christ? Was the Apostle Paul preaching the same thing as the Lord Jesus Christ or was the Lord Jesus Christ speaking something different? These are real issues that I have had to wrestle with. I think they are issues today that you yourself may wrestle with. When I was about 15 years old, I was involved with a Bible youth camp that I know today to be ultra-dispensationalists. At that time, I did not know what that was, but the concept of that teaching is basically this: that all of the words of Jesus which are the four gospels, were under the law. Everything that Jesus said was under the law. It only related to the law so therefore we can more or less ignore what Jesus said because he was under the law. The words that Jesus spoke basically don't really apply to us today, so let's leave those sayings alone. It was given to the apostle Paul to understand the mystery. As a result people like Peter, James, John and the 12 apostles didn't really understand the gospel. So therefore, what is done in ultra-dispensational thinking is to cut out the general epistles of Peter, James and John. Jesus was a man under the law, so we are not going to acknowledge the gospels. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, didn't understand grace so we can't put much emphasis on him. Therefore, we must cut out the first portion of the book of Acts because it relates to the ministry of the Apostle Peter.

There are two prominent people in the book of Acts, Peter and Paul. The first major emphasis in the book of Acts is the sermons of the Apostle Peter. Paul gets converted in Acts 9. In Acts 13, Paul is sent out and goes out on his first missionary journey. In Acts, chapter 13 we begin to focus on the Apostle Paul and his message. An ultra-dispensationalist will basically build his theology from about Acts, chapter 13 all the way through the rest of the Pauline letters. They won't say that what Jesus said was not true, but basically they wipe out most of the New Testament and focus on the 13 letters of the Apostle Paul. Because Hebrews may be written by Paul they emphasize this letter also.

I believe that there is a continuity and unity between the entire New Testament. That is my position. I am a dispensationalist, but I am not an ultra-dispensationalists. I believe that there is a distinction between the things that have been spoken to the church and things that were spoken to the nation of Israel. I try in my interpretation to divide those things correctly. But I also believe that there is a continuity in the entire New Testament including the gospels, the words of Jesus, Paul, Acts, James, Peter and John and all of the 12 apostles. Why do I say that? Luke 16:16 makes it plain that the law and the prophets in the Old Testament were until the time of John the Baptist. Since that time there has been only one message, one gospel that has been preached, it is the gospel of the kingdom of God. It was first taught by the Lord Jesus Christ. Mark 1:14-15 states, "Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, 'The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: Repent ye, and believe the gospel.'" Jesus' gospel was the gospel of God's kingdom. John the baptist said it was close, Jesus says it's here now in the person of Me. Jesus called people to repent, to change their minds and their attitudes, to turn a new direction, to come to Him for the forgiveness of sins, eternal life, and to believe the gospel. That was the preaching of Jesus. Although at this time He was not crucified, the preaching, message and gospel of Jesus are basically the same except they lacked the redemptive work that He said he was going to do. Jesus began to preach the gospel of the kingdom, He then commissioned 12 apostles to preach that message, and then commissioned 70 others also to preach it as well. As we go into the book of Acts, there is no doubt a continuation of that same message. We can see this very plainly as we go through Acts. As an example, Acts 8:5 states, "Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ to them." Verse 12, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women." So the preaching of the kingdom of God is accompanied by the preaching of Jesus Christ redemptive work throughout the book of Acts. The Apostle Paul preaches the same message (Acts 20:24-25; 28:23, 30-31). In his thirteen epistles, Paul also will use the phrase the kingdom of God. "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost." Paul is preaching the kingdom of God and it's King, Jesus Christ. In the Jewish mentality the kingdom of God produced the idea of a king...and the territory or people over whom a king rules (Vine's), in the Gentile world the word that was used was Lord. The concept is the same. Lord is a way of saying king and king is a way of saying lord. We also see Peter, James and John talking about the kingdom. John says unless a man is born again he shall not enter the kingdom of God (Jn. 3:3, 5). The kingdom of God is really the preaching and the basis of continuity between all the New Testament. It brings the gospels together, along with Acts, with Paul, with the general epistles, etc. The kingdom of God is the theme that brings unity to the entire teaching of the New Testament. Matthew 24:14 states, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come." It's the gospel of the kingdom that Paul preached, that the apostles preached, that Jesus preached, and is going to be preached at the consummation of the end of the age, to all the world. We must ask, is Jesus Christ preaching the same thing as the Apostle Paul? I conclude that he is. Different individuals are going to teach the same message in a different ways because different personalities are expressed. But the message has to be the same.

In Matthew 19:16 a man came to Jesus, the scriptures states, "And behold, one came and said unto him, Good master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" What is this man asking? First of all, let me say that this is an evangelist's dream. This is not somebody trying to pass out a tract. This is not one trying to witness to someone who doesn't want to hear. In the parallel account in Mark 10:17 it states, "...There came one running, and kneeled to Him and asked Him, 'Good Master what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?'" This man was asking the right question. He was asking about eternal life. He was not only asking the right question, he was asking the right person. He asked the person who could tell him how to have eternal life. Eternal life is a term used in the scriptures about 50 times. It's not talking about a quality of time, it's talking about a quality of existence; where a person is alive to God and to the things of God. The Jews saw eternal life as being the hope of life after death. That's what this man was asking. What can I do to get eternal life? Notice Matthew 19:17, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." Now, here's a man asking how to get eternal life. Instead of answering, Jesus asked him a question. He didn't say to sit down here and pray with me. He said, "I have a question for you, my question is why do you call me good, there is none good but God." I believe that what Jesus is really asking is do you recognize who I really am? That I am the one that can give you eternal life, do you recognize my deity? Then he said something amazing, He said, "If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments." Is that what the Apostle Paul said? That is exactly what the Apostle Paul said. Romans 2:13 says, "For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." Paul says it's not just those who hear the law but those who do the law that will be justified, declared righteous in God's sight. Paul is saying the same thing Jesus is saying. Jesus said if you want life, keep the commandments. Paul says if you want life, keep the commandments. Both Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul will then use that statement to their own advantage by showing that there has never been a man who has done it. Why did Paul say in Romans 2:13 that it's not the hearers of the law but the doers that shall be justified? Because he spent the first three chapters of the book of Romans making a statement showing that a man has never and can never do it. The Apostle Paul is going to go on to say that it's the law that will bring the knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:20). It will never make you right before God, therefore by keeping the law no one will ever be justified or be saved. Why? Because the law is not that standard? No! The law is the standard of righteous, holiness and goodness of God, but no man has ever been able to live up perfectly to the standard. Paul's point is the same as Jesus. When Jesus said to the rich young ruler, keep the commandments, He said that because he wanted to point something out to that man that he wasn't aware of. I see this in evangelism outreaches all the time. Whenever I witness to someone I say something similar to this: What do you think you have to do to go to heaven? Almost 80-90 percent of the time I'll get the answer, live a good life, or be the best you can, or keep the ten commandments, or some answer along these lines. I hear that over and over and over. Jesus knew that he was dealing with a self righteous man who had kept the commandments since his youth and he dealt with him in the only way that he could be reached. You see, the Bible says the law isn't made for a righteous man (1 Tim. 1:9-10). It's not made for the born again person. It's made for the unrighteous, the godless. This person thought he was righteous. In Matthew 19:18 the young man asked Jesus which ones of the commandments do I keep and Jesus named five of the ten commandments, thou shalt not murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, and honor thy father and thy mother. Then Jesus quoted Leviticus 19:18 that says "love thy neighbor as thyself." In verse 20, the young man says to Jesus "all these things I've kept" (Mt. 19:20). I hear it everyday, "I live by the golden rule, I keep the ten commandments, what do I lack?" Jesus says, "If you then will be perfect I'll tell you what to do: sell what you have, give to the poor and thou shalt have a treasure in heaven, then come and follow me!" What was Jesus saying? He was saying "You've kept the commandments have you? Love your neighbor as yourself, no problem, huh? Well then you are a rich man, take all your possessions and give them to your neighbor. If you love your neighbor just as you love yourself there should be no problem whatsoever in giving everything you have to someone else. If you love them like you say you do, then it's no problem." The man couldn't do it. Why? He had something in his heart and the Apostle Paul said that a covetous man is an idolater. What does that mean? He had another god enthroned. Matthew 19:22-23 says, "But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, 'Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven." In Mark's account of this story in chapter 10 verse 24, it says any rich man that "trusts" in his riches can't enter the kingdom. Jesus emphasized His point in Mt. 19:24 by saying, "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." When he says it's harder for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, he wasn't talking about a door over in Palestine where the camel takes off his bags and then he can barely get through. Jesus was trying to make a point. In Matthew and Mark the Greek word for needle used meant a sewing needle. In Luke's account it meant a surgical needle. Jesus said if you can take a camel and ram him through the eye of a little bitty needle, then a rich man can enter the kingdom. It struck the point with the disciples because verse 25 says they were exceedingly amazed and they asked who then could be saved? Can anyone be saved? What did Jesus say? Verse 26, "And Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, 'With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.' What was Jesus saying? He was saying, I am taking all your self righteousness away. I'm taking all your faith in your own works away. I'm taking all your own ability to keep the law and the commandments away. I am stripping you of everything. I am taking it all away. I will tell you how impossible it is for a man to be saved, for a man to save himself he must be able to take a camel and put it through the eye of a needle. Jesus was saying a man cannot save himself. Salvation is by grace, it's not by man's works or efforts. Jesus says with man it can't be done. Salvation only comes by the grace of God, and can only be done by God. Jesus' point was that salvation is by the grace of God. That's the same point that the Apostle Paul made, it's the same message. Man can't be saved by his own effort, and he can't be saved by the law. He can only be saved through Christ. I want to preach the same thing that Jesus preached, the kingdom of God, repentance, and faith in the gospel. In Acts 20, the Apostle Paul says I declare unto you publicly what I teach: it's the kingdom of God, involving repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (See Acts 20:20-21). It's the very same thing that Jesus Christ himself spoke (Mk. 1:15). It's the same thing that He told the twelve to speak (Mk. 6:12). It's the same He told the seventy to speak (Lk. 10:9, 13). It's the same thing the Apostle Paul says was his message (Acts 20:21, 24-25).


http://www.krowtracts.com/kingdom.html

The Kingdom Of God

By Don Krow

Jesus said that the law and the prophets were taught and in effect until the time of John the Baptist. Since that time the message this is to be proclaimed is the Kingdom of God (Lk. 16:16). Jesus also said that the gospel of the Kingdom would be preached in all the world, to all nations, before the end comes (Mt. 24:14). The apostle Paul states that there is only one gospel and it is referred to as the preaching of the Kingdom of God and is used interchangeably with the term the gospel of grace (Acts 20:24-25).

The proclamation of the gospel of the Kingdom was the only gospel preached by Jesus (Mk. 1:14-15), John the Baptist (Lk. 16:16), commissioned to the twelve (Lk. 9:1-6; Mk. 6:7-130), then to the seventy sent out by Christ (Lk. 10:1-12,16), Peter (Acts 2; 2 Pet. 1:10-11), Philip (Acts 8:5-8, 12), the apostle Paul (Acts 14:19-22; 19:8-10; 20:20-27; 28:23-31), James (Jas. 2:5), John (Rev. 1:9; Jn. 3) and all Christians throughout the end of the age (Mt. 24:14).

Within this message is the presentation and appeal to each individual to receive Jesus Christ as their King-Saviour. To receive Jesus Christ the King and His salvation is the only way to be restored to a full relationship and fellowship with God (Acts 4:12). The potential of His Kingdom ruling with us is now possible through the power of His Holy Spirit living within us (Rom. 14:17; Gal. 2:20; Rom. 8:2).

The transference of individuals from satan's authority to Jesus Christ's authority is described as movement from one kingdom unto another (Col. 1:13). The possibility of reinstatement to God's rulership is only possible through the forgiveness of our sins and the full redemption that is offered by the grace of God in Jesus Christ (Col. 1:13-14).

This present world system, also called this present evil age (Gal. 1:4), is under the sway of the wicked one (1 Jn. 5:19). We should be careful not to attribute satan's destructive rule of disorder, sin, confusion, disease and tragedy as being the works of Almighty God.

The announcement of the Kingdom of God was the announcement of God's King, Jesus Christ overthrowing satan's rule and works of darkness (1 Jn. 3:8). Jesus' rule is the offer of life and deliverance from the flesh and satan's rule (Rom. 6:16-19; Gal. 5:16). Jesus' ultimate victory over sin, demonic forces, and satan's right to rule men, was accomplished at the cross (Col. 2:13-15). It was Jesus' death and resurrection that is the sole foundation of a full reinstatement of relationship with God and rulership under Him (Col. 1:13-14).

The sermon on the mount outlines some of the foundational characteristics of individuals who are willing to receive his rule and the Kingdom He brings (Mt. 5-7). Nine times in this teaching the "kingdom" is mentioned (Mt. 5:3, 10, 19, 20; 6:10, 13, 33; 7:21). Christ's rule calls for humility (Mt. 5:3), willing to suffer for righteousness' sake (Mt. 5:10), the teaching and practicing of God's commands (Mt. 5:19), a life of prayer (Mt. 6:9), the willingness to forgive others (Mt. 6:14-15), the seeking first of eternal values over temporal things (Mt. 6:33), and submission to Christ's Lordship in deeds, not in just words (Mt. 7:21).

Because the apostle Paul's ministry was primarily to the Gentiles, Paul substituted the word "king" with its Gentile equivalent "Lord" in speaking of Christ's Kingdom. In the Roman Gentile world "king" was not used but "Lord" was. "Lord" carried the idea of Deity, as well as one having maximum authority, the boss. Unbelievers confessed Caesar as Lord, while Christians took their stand for Jesus as Lord. This caused great persecution for many Christians under Roman rule.

Although God's Kingdom is now in spiritual form, manifesting power to those who have been born again and received a new heart (Ezek. 36:26; Lk. 8:15). There will be a future coming of the Kingdom of God at the end of this age (Mt. 6:10; Acts 1:6).

In the New Testament, satan's kingdom stands over and against God's Kingdom (Col. 1:13). The kingdoms of this age are being controlled by satan's deception (Mt. 4:8; Lk. 4:5). The opposition between the two kingdoms, satan's and God's is acknowledged in 2 Cor. 4:4, as satan is seen to rule by holding men in spiritual darkness away from the light of the gospel.

Jesus' commission to His disciples was to preach the gospel of His Kingdom (Lk. 9:1-2), cast out demons and overthrow satan's power (Lk. 10:18), thus calling men through repentance and faith, into a new rule and deliverance from the power of darkness. John's gospel calls this a new birth (Jn. 3:3, 5), Paul a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17, Ezekiel a new heart and spirit (Ezek. 36:26). It brings men righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (Rom. 14:17).

In Jesus' preaching He invited everyone to enter His Kingdom by opening their lives to God's rule (Mk. 1:15). The church is the fellowship of those accepting Christ's offer of salvation and submitting to His rule (Mt. 7:21-23).

Vine's Expository Dictionary states the Greek word for "kingdom" (basileia) denotes "the territory or people over whom a king rules ... the Kingdom of God is the sphere of God's rule ... but since the earth is the scene of universal rebellion against God, the Kingdom of God is the sphere in which, at any given time, His rule is acknowledged ... Henceforth God calls upon men everywhere, without distinction of race or nationality, to submit voluntarily to His rule ... that a man is of the Kingdom of God is not shown in the punctilious observance of ordinances, which are external and material, but in the deeper matters of the heart, which are spiritual and essential, 'righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit' - Rom. 14:17, (from notes on Thessalonians by Hogg and Vine, pp. 68-70).

The advancement of God's Kingdom is a direct result of it's preaching (Lk. 16:16; Acts 10:22; 11:14).

 

[lightninboy]

What can Mid-Acts Dispensationalism do that Acts 2 Dispensationalism can't do better?

Basically nothing.

Acts 2 Dispensationalism is a work in progress, as is MAD.

As soon as MAD finds a fault with Acts 2 Dispensationalism, Acts 2 Dispensationalism can correct itself and be better than MAD.

MAD is more trouble than it is worth, and it isn't worth any more than Acts 2 Dispensationalism.

Paul had an exclusive mystery revealed to him? So what? Acts 2 Dispensationalism could handle that.

There was a gospel to the circumcision and a gospel to the uncircumcision? So what? Acts 2 Dispensationalism could handle that. Salvation is always by grace through faith plus nothing anyway.

http://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVSermons/GospelOfCircumcisionAndUncircumcision.htm

 

[Benjamin]

Predestination is based on God's forknowledge:

Romans 8:29-30
For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

This Scripture is clearly liniar in revelation and order. Notice that, for example, "justification" comes before "glorified"- obviously in order. Therefore, we must notice that predestination is carried out based on God's forknowledge- or God's ability to see ahead of time what the individuals heart condisition would be.

When this is understood- we have no confliction between the Biblical predestination model and the rest of the Word:

Acts 10:34
Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons.

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

 

[Lighthouse]

"Confliction?"

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Just One Gospel
A Look At Ultra-dispensationalism

by Don Krow

"I disagree with dispensational extremists who relegate whole sections of Scripture - including the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord's Prayer - to a yet-future kingdom era.

I have a difficult time relegating the "sermon on the Mount" to the present dispensation of grace:

"To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation" (2Cor.5:19).

The Lord Jesus is now on the throne of grace,and during the present dispensation he is not passing judgment upon man (Jn.12:47).

The "Sermon on the Mount",on the other hand,speaks of a time when judgment will not be delayed:

"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

30And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell" (Mt.5:27-30).

I am not sure how Mr.Krow would reconcile these words with preaching of the "word of reconciliation".

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Damian]

http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/hyperdispensationalism.html

Hyper-Dispensationalism
by Brother Ruckman

Is this Dr. Peter S.Ruckman, the Baptist preacher who teaches that the KJV Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God?"

 

[lightninboy]

Is this Dr. Peter S.Ruckman, the Baptist preacher who teaches that the KJV Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ruckman
http://www.kjv1611.org/PSR.htm
http://dmoz.org/Society/Religion_an...gy/Dispensationalism/Hyper-Dispensationalism/
http://p079.ezboard.com/fthemidweekrapturefrm127.showMessage?topicID=4.topic
http://www.kjv1611.org/2006 Catalog/02cat-8-23.pdf

I guess the article was written by Peter S. Ruckman.

 

[lightninboy]

I have a difficult time relegating the "sermon on the Mount" to the present dispensation of grace:

I am not sure how Mr.Krow would reconcile these words with preaching of the "word of reconciliation".

In His grace,--Jerry

Don Krow gives us an example of a "one gospel" argument.

http://www.fundamentalforums.com/showthread.php?t=12048&page=6
http://www.gty.org/resources.php?section=study&studyid=13409&aid=230012
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/dispen/sermon.htm

 

[Damian]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ruckman
http://www.kjv1611.org/PSR.htm
http://dmoz.org/Society/Religion_an...gy/Dispensationalism/Hyper-Dispensationalism/
http://p079.ezboard.com/fthemidweekrapturefrm127.showMessage?topicID=4.topic
http://www.kjv1611.org/2006 Catalog/02cat-8-23.pdf

I guess the article was written by Peter S. Ruckman.

Okay. Read the Wikipedia link; that's the one. Do you realize that Ruckman's theology has racist elements?

 

[Bob Hill]

God raised up the Apostle Paul and gave him a different gospel and dispensation from Peter and the eleven, who preached the gospel of the circumcision.

Paul was given a dispensation that was a mystery, never revealed before, the Dispensation of Grace. 1 Cor 9:17-18 For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have been entrusted with a dispensation. 18 What is my reward then? That when I preach the gospel, I may present the gospel of Christ without charge, that I may not abuse my authority in the gospel.

Eph 3:1-4 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles; 2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

We find in Acts 15 that Paul went up to Jerusalem to tell them about the new gospel that God gave to him according to Gal 1:11-2:10. The Holy Spirit showed the apostles that Paul’s gospel was valid at that council.

Eph 1:5-10 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6 [Here’s the mystery.] that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, 7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. 8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the dispensation of the mystery, which has been hidden from the ages in God who created all things through Jesus Christ. 10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one, the all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth -- in Him.

This gospel that was given to Paul was a different gospel. That’s what the Galatian material is all about: Gal 2:7-9 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision had been committed to me, as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for [eis] the apostleship of the circumcision also worked effectively in me toward [eis] the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to [eis] the Gentiles and they to [eis] the circumcision.

Paul was faithful to this new program that God gave him. It tells us of his faithfulness in Col 1:24-29: I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up in my flesh what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ, for the sake of His body, which is the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the dispensation of God which was given to me for you, to fulfill the word of God, 26 the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints. 27 To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 28 Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. 29 To this end I also labor, striving according to His working which works in me mightily.

We should be faithful to this dispensational program that God gave Paul for us. But, most do not even know that the Bible places so much importance on the Dispensation of the Mystery. Most Christians are not even aware that God says we all “should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the dispensation of the mystery.”

Because of this separation by God, there are 2 spheres where believers go when they die. For the circumcision and proselytes, they go into the kingdom promised to David. Christ will be the king. For the body of Christ of this dispensation, we have a heavenly hope. Phi 3:20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.

There are extremely important, major differences between our dispensation of grace and the circumcision dispensation. Works for salvation and water baptism are two of the big differences between the circumcision gospel and the gospel that God gave to Paul.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

The Dispensation of Grace was a mystery and a secret, hidden in God until He raised up the Apostle Paul and gave him a new message, a different gospel, and dispensation different from the one that He had given to Peter and the eleven, who preached the gospel of the circumcision.

This Dispensation of Grace that was a mystery, was never revealed before God dealt with Saul, who we now call Paul. 1 Cor 9:17-18 For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have been entrusted with a dispensation. 18 What is my reward then? That when I preach the gospel, I may present the gospel of Christ without charge, that I may not abuse my authority in the gospel.

We see this program of grace clearer in Eph 3:1-4: For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles; 2 if indeed you have heard of the Dispensation of the Grace of God which was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ. Before this, we see in Acts 15 that Paul went up to Jerusalem to tell them about the new gospel that God gave to him according to Galations. The Holy Spirit showed the apostles at that council, that this new gospel, Paul’s gospel, was valid.

Gal 1:11-2:9 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it. 14 And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, 16 to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, (That was for 3 years, as we’ll see in the next verse.) and returned again to Damascus. 18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. 19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother. 20 (Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie.) 21 Afterward I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 22 And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ. 23 But they were hearing only, “He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith which he once tried to destroy.” 24 And they glorified God in me. Chapter 2 1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me. 2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. 4 And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), 5 to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you. 6 But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man - for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. 7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision had been committed to me, as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship of the circumcision also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcision.

Then, in Ephesian 3, Paul explained how He got the new message that was given to him by Christ, to preach to the Gentiles, and the Jews. Eph 3:1-9 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles - 2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), 5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6 that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, 7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. 8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable (Why did he say it was unsearchable? Because it was not found anywhere in the Bible until the ascended Christ revealed it to Paul.) riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the Dispensation of the Mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ.

The 5th verse again. which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6 [Here’s the mystery.] that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, 7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. 8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the dispensation of the mystery, which has been hidden from the ages in God who created all things through Jesus Christ. 10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one, the all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth - in Him.

This gospel that was given to Paul by the ascended Lord, Jesus Christ, was a different gospel that had never been mentioned before it was given to Paul. That’s what the Galatian material is all about: Gal 2:7-9 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision had been committed to me, as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for [eis unto] the apostleship of the circumcision also worked effectively in me toward [eis unto] the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to [eis unto] the Gentiles and they to [eis unto] the circumcision.

Paul was faithful to this new program that God gave him. It tells us of his faithfulness in Col 1:24-29: I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up in my flesh what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ, for the sake of His body, which is the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the dispensation of God which was given to me for you, to fulfill the word of God, 26 the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints. 27 To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 28 Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. 29 To this end I also labor, striving according to His working which works in me mightily.

We should be faithful to this dispensational program that God gave to Paul for us. But, most of our fellow members of the Body of Christ, do not even know that the Bible places so much importance on the Dispensation of the Mystery. Most Christians are not even aware that God says we all “should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the dispensation of the mystery.”

Because of this separation by God, there are 2 spheres where believers go when they die. For the circumcision and proselytes, who believed before the Body of Christ began with the conversion of Saul/Paul, they go into the kingdom promised to David. Christ will be their king.

For anyone who believed in Christ as his savior after God raised up the Apostle Paul, he became a member of the body of Christ, according to this Dispensation of Grace. We are the ones who have a heavenly hope. Phi 3:20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.

There are extremely important, major differences between our Dispensation of Grace and the Circumcision Dispensation. Works for salvation and water baptismal regeneration are two of the big differences between the circumcision gospel and the gospel that God gave to Paul. I’ll deal with these issues.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

In the Dispensation of the Grace of God, which we are in, Eph 3:2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you.

According to Eph 1:3, we see that God wants to pour out spiritual blessings on us Christians.

For us, we see that these blessings are accomplished by the Father. Eph 1:3 “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ.” But, it goes further. God chose us, corporately, in Christ. Whether this corporation was foreknown as a corporation or as individuals, is debatable. Eph 1:4 “in as much as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world.”

This word, chose, can be translated I select, or I choose. So the first thing we should know, is Jesus Christ is the selected one. Christ is the one in and by whom the Father accomplishes His blessings. Isaiah 42:1 prophesied: “Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles.” Christ was chosen to be the redeemer, not just for Israel, but also for Gentiles.

The body of Christ was a mystery, hidden in God until He revealed it to the Apostle Paul. Eph 3:1-9 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles - 2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), 5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6 that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and mutual partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, 7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. 8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to make all see what is the dispensation of the mystery, which has been hidden from the ages in God who created all things through Jesus Christ.

In Christ,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

Colossians makes the Body of Christ even more clearly: Col 1:24-27 I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up in my flesh what is lacking in the afflictions for Christ, for the sake of His body, which is the church, 25&26 of which I became a minister according to the dispensation of God which was given to me for you, to complete the word of God, the mystery, which has been hidden from the ages and from the generations, but now has been revealed to His saints. 27 To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ among you, the hope of glory.

Getting back to Eph 1:3-14, first, the whole passage: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved. 7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace 8 which He made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence, 9 having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, 10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth - in Him. 11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory. 13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.”

In Christ my Savior,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

When we look at election more closely, in this dispensation of grace, I believe the election of men is only in Christ. When a person yields to the prompting of the Holy Spirit and believes that Christ died for him, then, he becomes a member of Christ’s body, the church.

Outside of Christ, according to the Bible, there is no election of anyone.

In Eph 1:4, God chose us in Christ.

In verse 5, God gave the predestinated adoption to us.

In verse 11, God definitely confirmed that we are inheritors in Christ.

In verse 13, God sealed us in Christ. Therefore, we see love and blessings here, not fatalism.

So, we are chosen and sealed because we believed in Christ. Eph 1:4,12,13 “just as He chose us in Him 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory. 13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise.”

He didn’t choose us to be saved. He wants all to be saved, 1 Tim 2:3-6 “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.”

He chose us to be holy and blameless. Eph 1:4 “He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, to be holy and without blame before Him in love.” He chose everyone who would believe in Christ to be holy and blameless.

Christ paid with His life. After we believed, He made our salvation certain with predestination. Eph 1:5 “having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will. And He did all this by His grace. Eph 1:6 “to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved.

So, God’s election is not to salvation. It is to perfection, because we are in Christ.

It is for our eternal security. We who trust in Christ as our Savior have this security. This is a spiritual blessing for the body of Christ alone.

In Christ my Redeemer,
Bob Hill

 

[Bob Hill]

What is God’s will? I believe we can break God’s will down into 3 scriptural categories.

1. His intentional will (thelayma).

2. His circumstantial will (thelayma).

3. His ultimate, or determinate will or counsel (boulay).

When we look at His intentional will, the first thing we should see is this. We were created for His will (pleasure).

The most important question we must keep in mind here, is this: do we ever thwart God’s intentional will?

Rev 4:11 “You are worthy, O Lord, To receive glory and honor and power; For You created all things, and by Your will they exist and were created.”

Next, as part of this, He wants everyone to love Him.
Mk 12:30,31 “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. This is the first commandment. 31 And the second, like it, is this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Then, In Paul’s words, it says in 1 Co 16:22 “If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed. O Lord, come!

Transdispensationally, He also wants us all to love one another.” John 13:34 “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.”

Then for us in the Dispensation of Grace He said,
1 Th 4:9,10 “But concerning brotherly love you have no need that I should write to you, for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another; 10 and indeed you do so toward all the brethren who are in all Macedonia. But we urge you, brethren, that you increase more and more.

In Christ,
Bob Hill