DISPENSATIONALISM IS AN UNBIBLICAL DOCTRINE

[Eddie Ramos]

Dispensationalism is a word which describes that God had a different plan of salvation for the people on the Old Testament side of the cross than he did for the people on the New Testament side of the cross. For example it is believed by many that from the time of the fall of Adam and Eve, that people were saved by their good works (obedience to God's law, the Bible), then after the cross, obedience to the law of God was no longer necessary for salvation. That is, after the cross, one only had to believe in Jesus in order to be saved.

To demonstrate this doctrine, I copied and pasted a comment in a thread I found in this forum which said, "Good works earned one salvation under the Old Testament. That is, if a person never violated any of God's laws, he or she gained eternal life..... Under the New Testament, man came under grace and not the demands of the law.".

I will debate the side that states that there was only ever one way for God's elect to become saved throughout the history of the world. It was always by grace through the faith of Christ. As my opening support, I would like to put forth this passage:

Genesis 6:6–9 (KJV 1900)
6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Here we are told that the whole world was corrupt, yet Noah found grace in God's eyes. The word grace is the word "favor". Noah found favor in God's eyes. Noah did not find grace because of his good works, else grace is no more grace (Rom 11:6). God describing Noah as just and perfect, isn't describing what Noah had earned as a result of his good works, because the Old Testament clearly tells us that:

....there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not. Ecclesiastes 7:20 (KJV 1900)

AND,

If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or near; 1 Kings 8:46 (KJV 1900)

So, when God describes someone as being perfect and just, it's because God is looking at the heart (1 Sam 16:7). A perfect heart which could only come as a result of having been saved by God's grace. This is why good works could never have earned anyone salvation before the cross. Else not a single person could have become saved prior to the cross because all have sinned.

Psalm 14:2–3 (KJV 1900)
2  The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3  They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy:
There is none that doeth good, no, not one.

The initial question for this debate is, what are the biblical texts used to support the doctrine of dispensationalism?

[Eddie Ramos]

... there was only ever one way for God's elect to become saved throughout the history of the world. It was always by grace through the faith of Christ. As my opening support, I would like to put forth this passage:

Genesis 6:6–9 (KJV 1900)
6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

WAS NOAH A CHRISTIAN?

The LORD here could not have been Jesus as Noah was born many thousands of years before Jesus came to earth.


GENESIS 6:8

American Standard Version
But Noah found favor in the eyes of Jehovah.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And Noah found favor in the eyes of LORD JEHOVAH.

Literal Standard Version
And Noah found grace in the eyes of YHWH.

World English Bible
But Noah found favor in Yahweh's eyes.

Young's Literal Translation
And Noah found grace in the eyes of Jehovah.

RELATED POSTS


Was Job perfect?
viewtopic.php?p=753100#p753100

To learn more please go to other posts related to ...

NOAH, THE PROPHETS and ... THE FLOOD OF NOAH'S DAY

The unfortunate part for Jehovahs Witnessses is that because Christ can't be seen as eternal God himself, (meaning as Jehovah), then passages like that of Noah finding grace (for by grace ye are saved....) makes no sense. But this passage is difficult even for a very many who can see that Christ is God and that he died on the Cross at the turn of the Old Testament Era to pay for sins, because that's the moment they believe we entered into the Era of salvation by grace, which is also incorrect.

Salvation by grace was always the only way to become saved. But how can that be since Christ's death was the means by which we obtained grace?

Romans 3:23-24 (KJV) 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

John 1:17 (KJV) 17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.


And the fact that we read of individuals, such as Noah, finding grace in the eyes of Jehovah long before the New Testament cross, teaches us that there is more information that we're not taking into account. Like the fact that Chriat died and rose to pay for sins before the world was created and that the cross was a demonstration of what Christ had already accomplished.

Revelation 13:8 (KJV) 8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Now we can understand how any old Testament elect could find grace in the eyes of God and so be saved. But that would mean that Christ had to be far more than just someone who was born in time and lived a sinless life. And, of course, the scriptures attest to the fact that Christ is none other that the one true God himself. The problem with that which was created to try and understand an infinite creator is that we can't. Therefore, the only thing we can do is to try to understand God based solely on what information he has given us about himself (rather than using our logic). And when we take all the pieces (verses) and put them together properly, we can come to no other conclusion that Jesus Christ is the Almighty God who died for sins and rose again from the foundation of the world and then created all things.

[JehovahsWitness]

... Christ is none other that the one true God himself.

IS CHRIST THE "ONE TRUE GOD" ?

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

To learn more please go to to other posts related to ...

GOD, JESUS and ...THE "TRINITY TEXTS" DEBUNKED

[Eddie Ramos]

... Christ is none other that the one true God himself.

IS CHRIST THE "ONE TRUE GOD" ?

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

To learn more please go to to other posts related to ...

GOD, JESUS and ...THE "TRINITY TEXTS" DEBUNKED

Absolutely, but the only way to properly conclude this is not by picking which verses best suit us, but rather by putting all of the pieces together to see how the whole picture agrees as one cohesive truth.

[JehovahsWitness]

... Christ is none other that the one true God himself.

IS CHRIST THE "ONE TRUE GOD" ?

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

To learn more please go to to other posts related to ...

GOD, JESUS and ...THE "TRINITY TEXTS" DEBUNKED

Absolutely, but the only way to properly conclude this is not by picking which verses best suit us....

All verses should "suit us" John 17 verse 3 is no exception. The expression "One True God" is not particularly common in scripture and here we have The Lord himself explain its import. Who better to identify the participants than on of the two key figures mentioned?

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

[Eddie Ramos]

... Christ is none other that the one true God himself.

IS CHRIST THE "ONE TRUE GOD" ?

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

To learn more please go to to other posts related to ...

GOD, JESUS and ...THE "TRINITY TEXTS" DEBUNKED

Absolutely, but the only way to properly conclude this is not by picking which verses best suit us....

All verses should "suit us" John 17 verse 3 is no exception. The expression "One True God" is not particularly common in scripture and here we have The Lord himself explain its import. Who better to identify the participants than on of the two key figures mentioned?

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

Again, any conclusion we make based on our own logic, when it comes to understanding God and his Word, will be skewed by our finite understanding of an infinite being. As I stated, all we can know about God is that which he has given us, in his Word, to understand. We cannot look at God as the "sender" and Christ as the "sendee" and conclude that logically they cannot be one and the same. The scriptures won't allow that "logic".

I'll give you one example:

Who did all the high priests of the Old Testament represent? Christ, the true high priest, of course.

Hebrews 3:1 (KJV 1900)
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Hebrews 4:14 (KJV 1900)
Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.

It was the high priests job to offer sacrifices unto God on behalf of the people, in order to make atonement. So what was one of the sacrifices that the high priest offered? A lamb without blemish (Lev 14:12). And who did the lamb represent? Again, Jesus Christ.

John 1:29 (KJV 1900)
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

So according to these parallels, just as the high priest offered sacrifices unto God, so too Jesus offered himself to atone for sins. But then why didn't the high priests of the Old Testament offer themselves to have a perfect parallel picture? Why offer a lamb instead? Because both, the "sacrificer and the sarificee" represent the same thing. Not logical, but biblical. And because we trust the Bible, we trust God's own methods (never our own) for explaining his own Word.

Unfortunately, recognizing Jesus as Jehovah himself in the flesh, is probably one of the biggest problems with those religions that want to identify as God's children, but are actually not. This is one of the greatest tests that God has placed in the Bible which many, sadly, fail.

John 8:24 (KJV 1900)
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I AM, ye shall die in your sins.

So, it's no surprise that when God speaks of himself, that he would use language similar to that of the high priests and their offerings, as being one and the same.

Jeremiah 23:5–6 (KJV 1900)
Behold, the days come, saith JEHOVAH, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and THIS IS HIS NAME whereby HE (speaking of Jesus) shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

So, Jehovah was going to raise up a righteous branch and king whose name is Jehovah? Does this make sense logically? No, but again, this is God's Word and God wrote it the way he intended to write it. And our job is to faithfully put the pieces together to see the whole picture if God has granted us eyes to see it.

Isaiah 9:6 (KJV 1900)
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
And the government shall be upon his shoulder:
And his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Is this saying that this child that was to be born, this son, is to be called the everlasting Father? Logic tells us that a son of the father cannot be the father as well, yet here God is telling us the exact opposite. This child/son, who is Christ, is the everlasting Father. He is Jehovah, our righteousness. Make any logical sense to you? Not to me. But do we trust the Word of God in all that it says, even if our mind can't make logical sense of this kind of language? I do.

[JehovahsWitness]

... any conclusion we make based on our own logic, when it comes to understanding God and his Word, will be skewed by our finite understanding of an infinite being.

If you are saying we cannot be confident in any logical argument based on scripture because we are finite beings, not only is that conclusion unscriptural it invalidates anything you are about to say.




JW

[Eddie Ramos]

... any conclusion we make based on our own logic, when it comes to understanding God and his Word, will be skewed by our finite understanding of an infinite being.

If you are saying we cannot be confident in any logical argument based on scripture because we are finite beings, not only is that conclusion unscriptural it invalidates anything you are about to say.




JW

It's certainly not unscriptural, which is precisely why it's important for each one of us to be confident in how God would have us to approach the scriptures. And if you have no scriptures to show for what you think is the proper method of understanding the scriptures, then what exactly are you being confident in? Your own logic and reasoning? But as always, God doesn't leave us in the dark regarding what happens when man reasons with man about God's Words while leaving the Word of God out of that reasoning.

Mark 11:28–33 (KJV 1900)
And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things? 29 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. 30 The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me. 31 And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then did ye not believe him? 32 But if we shall say, Of men; they feared the people: for all men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed. 33 And they answered and said unto Jesus, We cannot tell. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.

If you look up every single instance where people reasoned among themselves (even those who were saved, like his disciples), you will see that they arrived at an incorrect conclusion.

Matthew 16:6–8 (KJV 1900)
Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. 7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread. 8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?

Instead, what God wants us to do is to reason with Him, meaning with his Word.

Isaiah 1:18 (KJV 1900)
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:
Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow;
Though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

I more than welcome anyone to invalidate anything that I say that is not found in the scriptures, because my own logic is worthless and I try as best as possible not to make statements that are not taught in the scriptures for fear that I may be speaking of my own authority rather than Christ's.

So, to have a discussion on the scriptures, we must include the scriptures in our discussion and not leave them out. You believe that logic is a necessary part of understanding the scriptures, then please show it from the scriptures. This way we can al see where your words are coming from. That is the point of reasoning with the Word of God.

Isaiah 55:7–9 (KJV 1900)
7  Let the wicked forsake his way,
And the unrighteous man his thoughts:
And let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him;
And to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
8  For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
Neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9  For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts.

[JehovahsWitness]

... God doesn't leave us in the dark regarding what happens when man reasons with man about God's Words while leaving the Word of God out of that reasoning.

So despite being finite beings we can indeed reason about God's Words as long as we are careful not to leave Word of God out of that reasoning. Here is what the word of God says about the identity of the One True God ...

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

[JehovahsWitness]

... both, the "sacrificer and the sarificee" represent the same thing. Not logical, but biblical.

Firstly, The High Priest and the lamb did not represent the same thing and there is always logic in scripture. But even putting poor a understanding of the Hebrew system aside, neither the High Priest nor the sacrificial lamb were depicted as being the recipient: we STILL had a seperate individual that was neither one nor the other! In short there was the mediator (the high priest) the validator (the lamb) and the recipient (God).

Further since Jesus was not literally a small farm animal (nor was he of the Priestly line of Levi), we are talking about theses things being illustrative. An illustration can selectively apply to different aspects of the same individual. Which is why someone can be ... crazy like a fox and as beautiful as Julia Robert and as rich as Roosevelt without being part of a "trinity".

[Eddie Ramos]

... God doesn't leave us in the dark regarding what happens when man reasons with man about God's Words while leaving the Word of God out of that reasoning.

So despite being finite beings we can indeed reason about God's Words as long as we are careful not to leave Word of God out of that reasoning. Here is what the word of God says about the identity of the One True God ...

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

The problem is that you think that by citing one or two verses (which are only part of the whole equation), that you have absolute understanding of the whole picture. That is the most dangerous way to arrive at a conclusion.

Revelation 12:9 (KJV 1900)
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

If I said that Satan deceives the whole world, would you agree because it's plainly written here? This means that there is no one that he does not deceive. And it doesn't say that he tries to deceive the whole world, it says that he does. Would not we rather base our conclusion of what the whole of the scriptures has to say about Satan deceiving, before we can conclude that it is in fact not the whole world that is deceived, but rather the unsaved within the whole world? And that he tries to deceive the children of God? But he is not able because we flee from the voice of strangers.

John 10:4–5 (KJV 1900)
And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. 5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

This can be said of any doctrine we hold to be true. I have cited thus far many scriptures for you to examine about Christ being Jehovah, and so far no response, but that's fine, you can take your time or choose not to answer altogether, but by refusing to see how they agree (rather, disagree) with your doctrine means that you are only fooling yourself.

Who then is the one true God? Well, Jesus said it was the one who sent him.

John 17:3 (KJV 1900)
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Why is it important for them to know both, the one true God AND Jesus Christ whom God sent? Because they are one God.

1 John 5:7–8 (KJV 1900)
For there are three that bear record (witness) in heaven, the Father, the Word (Christ), and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness (record) in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. (This by the way is where we learn that the scriptures are in perfect harmony with each other, and so must our doctrines be with the scriptures).

And since the one true God dent Jesus, does that mean that the one true God (Jehovah) is not the same as Jesus? Well, let's gather more information as to who the one true God (Jehovah) sent before we arrive at a conclusion.

Jeremiah 23:5–6 (KJV 1900)
Behold, the days come, saith JEHOVAH, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his (Christ's) name whereby he shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Isn't that interesting that Jehovah sent Jehovah? But can this be correct? I'll continue to post the same scriptures I posted before.

Isaiah 9:6 (KJV 1900)
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
And the government shall be upon his shoulder:
And his name (the son's name, which is the Christ) shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Look at that. This child's/son's name is "the Everlasting Father". How can that be? Because they are one and the same God. So, please answer directly this time, who is Jeremiah 23:5-6 and Isaiah 9:6 speaking of if not the Christ? And why is he called Jehovah and the Everlasting Father? Of course, the scriptures only contain one truth, which will inevitably lead to continual contradiction if Christ is rejected as Jehovah in the flesh.