Arguing Against the New Covenant Doctrines of A Sovereign Christ

[tulsa 2011]

Arguing Against the New Covenant Doctrines of A Sovereign Christ

"Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him..........Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else." Deuteronomy 4: 35,39

"Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.' Proverbs 3: 5-6

"I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images." Isaiah 42: 8

"And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it. 5. Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 6. O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel." Jeremiah 18: 4-6

"Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?" Isaiah 29: 16

"Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20. Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21. Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22. What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23. And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory." Romans 9: 19-23

God is sovereign. The doctrines which God created for the New Covenant are absolute and cannot be added to nor taken away by men working through what Christ calls the tradition of men (Matthew 15: 6, 9).

God the Father through Jesus Christ remade Old Covenant Israel. Christ did away with the Old Covenant as Hebrews 10: 9 says "He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."

"Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? and how do you see it now? is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing?.............And I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of hosts....The glory of this latter house shall be greater than the former, saith the Lord of hosts...." Haggai 2: 9

The latter house of Israel was foretold in Jeremiah 18: 1-6 - the parable of the potter - and in Jeremiah 32: 31-33. It is this New Covenant that Haggai says will be greater than the Old Covenant.

Hebrews 8: 6 says Christ is the mediator of a better covenant, which was establihed with better promises. "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxed old is ready to vanish away." Hebrews 8: 13.

In fact, Hebrew 10: 9 says Christ took away the Old Covenant that he may establish the second (covenant). This is New Testament doctrine of a sovergign God who does not share his sovereignty, with anyone, including man, It is absolute truth, not to be diminished, compromised nor added to.

Yet man comes along and tries to change that absolute truth about the Old Covenant being taken away so that Christ could establish the New Covenant.

John Darby said that the
"Church has sought to settle itself here, but it has no place on the
earth... [Though] making a most constructive parenthesis, it forms no
part of the regular order of God's earthly plans, but is merely an
interruption of them to give a fuller character and meaning to
them..."

John. N. Darby, 'The Character of Office in The Present Dispensation'
Collected Writings., Eccl. I, Vol. I, p. 94.

"Them" are all physical Israel, or Old Covenant Israel. The church, for Darby exists to "give
fuller character and meaning to all physical Israel." Darby thought that the purpose of the
Christian church, the ekklesia as a meeting, assembly or congregation
of Israel reborn in Christ, made into The Body of
Christ like the Catholic capital C Church, was to honor all physical
Israel.

"Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne so that in eternity, '...never the twain, Israel and church, shall meet." Lewis S. Chafer, Systematic Theology (Dallas, Dallas Seminary Press, 1975), Vol. 4. pp. 315-323...

Charles C. Ryrie (born 1925) says:
"basic promise of Dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed
in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction
throughout eternity." Charles C. Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today,1966, pp.44-45.

This is man trying to make changes in the doctrine of Christ on Old Covenant Israel.

The men who created this tradition of men taught that God now has two peoples, Old Covenant Israel and the Capital C Church (as different from the church from ekklesia, the meeting, assembly or congregation).

"And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." John 10: 16

"For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." Romans 12: 4-5

"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;" Ephesians 4: 4

John 10: 16, Romans 12: 4-5 and Ephesians 4; 4 are not "nonessentials," which can be ignored because they are not thought to be part of an "essential" Gospel of Christ. These texts on there bring one Body of Christ, one elect group, are basic fundamentals of the Gospel of Christ.

Saying that Old Covenant Israel somehow still exists or will exist again is making an argument against the absolute truth of the doctrines of a sovereign Christ. This is the dialectic. The dialectic argues against that which is absolute, as truth of doctrines or as truth of morality.

Revelation 13: 11-12 says "And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed."

The second beast of Revelation 13 is the False Prophet, though not one individual. The second beast represents the many false prophets of Matthew 24: 11 who are said to rise and deceive many. The false prophets have two horns like a lamb, but they speak like the dragon. OK, a young sheep does not have two horns. But the false prophets give the appearance of being lambs, while they speak like a dragon.

The false prophets speak a deceptive language; they speak the dialectic, which means that the dialectic is from the Dragon who used it on Eve in Genesis 3: 1-6 to correct her obedience to God and by the Pharisees in John Chapter 8 to argue against the Truth, which was Christ standing among them.

Jesus Christ is speaking truth, or absolute facts here. But the
Pharisees who heard him did not believe he was the Truth and what he
spoke were absolute facts. They answered " We be Abraham's seed, and
were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made
free?......Christ said: "I speak that which I have seen with my
Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They
answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto
them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of
Abraham." John 8: 33, 38,39

In John 8: 41 Jesus said to the Pharisees "Ye do the deeds of your
father." The Pharisees answered him: " We be not born of fornication;
we have one Father, even God."

This verbatim account in John 8 is an example of the dialectic argument against the absolute truth of the doctrines of a soverign Christ. Christ had changed things, changed Old Covenant Israel, and the Pharisees are arguing against that change by use of doctrines from the Old Covenant or their version of the Old Covenant.

"For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by
us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in
him was yea. For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him
Amen, unto the glory of God by us." II Corinthians 1:19-20

In Jesus Christ there are no shades of grey, no double mindedness,
only absolutes. The dialectic
mind, on the other hand, operates on shades of grey and doublemindedness.

"But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven,
neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be
yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation." James 5: 12

The dialectic mind starts from a position that there are no
absolute truths or absolute morals. It is a double minded mind, and
accepts yea and nay about doctrines taught in the scripture. Those who
use dialectic
arguments against the facts of scripture are always looking for
loopholes, shades
of grey, contradictions and verses where the meanings and implications
are not spelled out in great detail to hit at with their rejection of
the absolute. The literal mindset taught by many Christian leaders leads also to a rejection of scriptures that teach by implication or are just too subtle for the literal mind to grasp.

Those who operate with the dialectic argument against the truth of a sovereign Christ
try to justify themselves before men (Luke 16: 1).

 

[Br. Bear]

Greetings,

Is talking about 'dialectic' explanatory of/for 'sovereign Christ'?
Neither term is Biblical.

Why do so many like to push the 'sovereign' label? Sovereign is in respect to royalty.
Anyone who knows Christ does not have a problem with Him being Lord. Using the 'sovereign' label to push doctrine is unnecessary unless it is to push a doctrine.
Using terms like 'dialectic' and 'dispensation' are unprofitable and intellectual smoke screening used either to present some new doctrines which do nothing to further the Gospel or because those using them do so to hide their ignorance of Gospel truth.

Bless you ....><>

 

[tulsa 2011]

I try to avoid getting into arguments with individuals on Christian forums. The issues of the New Testament saying there is one Body of Christ, not two, and of Romans 11: 25-26 and "...so all Israel shall be saved" are important and a focus on these can help in understanding Old Covenant Israel in the New Covenant. This is the issue which is a large part of the falling away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 and Luke 13; 21. .

"And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." John 10: 16

"For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." Romans 12: 4-5

"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;" Ephesians 4: 4

Followers of John Darby, C.I. Scofield and Lewis S. Chafer will often sidestep John 10: 16. Romans 12: 4-5, and Ephesians 4: 4 and quote Romans 11: 26, "And so all Israel shall be saved." They may quote Romans 11: 25-26.

Paul uses Israel eleven times in Romans, once in I Corinthians, twice in II Corinthians, once in Galatians, once in Ephesians and once in Philippians.

In all verses where he uses Israel, only in three verses does Israel not mean physical or Old Covenant Israel. In three verses Paul uses Israel to refer to Israel remade in Christ, the Israel of God of Galatians 6: 16.

In Romans 9: 6 Paul says "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

What does he mean by "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel?" They "which are of Israel " refers to those who are the literal physical descendants of Abraham by Isaac and Jacob, or Old Covenant Israel. Some, a remnant in Romans 11: 1-5, of Old Covenant Israel, became part of the other Israel Paul refers to in Romans 9: 6. And some who became part of that other Israel in Romans 9: 6 were not of physical Israel, not of the bloodline from Abraham.

In Galatians 6: 16 Paul uses "the Israel of God." Remember that in I Corinthians 10: 18 he says "Behold, Israel after the flesh..." The Israel of God is that Israel which is different from Israel after the flesh, who are not of the Israel of God of the New Covenant.

Paul is making a distinction between Old Covenant Israel and remade Israel (Jeremiah 18: 1-6).

Applying this distinction to Romans 11: 25-26, Israel in verse 25 is Old Covenant Israel.

But then in verse 26 Paul says all Israel shall be saved. Which Israel is the Israel in which all are to be saved? Verse 26 is very difficult to figure out in isolation. When a tradition of men - Darby, Scofield, Chafer - steps in and interprets verse 26 as being a prophecy for the future, that some day all Old Covenant Israel shall be saved, many who have not been taught to interpret Scripture by other relevant scripture will accept that interpretation by a tradition of men.

The tradition of men of John Darby, C.I. Scofield and Lewis S. Chafer appears not to accept the distinction that Paul makes in Romans 9: 6, Galatians 6: 16 and I Corinthians 10: 18 between Old Covenant Israel and remade Israel.

Accepting that distinction that Paul made and applying it to Romans 11: 26 would say to be careful and look at the possibility that the Israel in Romans 11: 26 is not Old Covenant Israel, but the Israel of God of Galatians 6: 16, different from Israel after the flesh.

Could Paul mean that verse 26 is a future prophecy saying that all Old Covenant Israel will be saved some day? Remember that in Romans 11: 1-5 Paul is careful to explain that only a remnant of Old Covenant Israel was elected by grace. He says in Romans 11: 17-20 that those who did not believe in Christ were broken off. Those of Old Covenant Israel who rejected Christ were broken off. Since Paul says a remnant was elected by grace, then those who rejected Christ and were broken off were the multitude of Old Covenant Israel. This is not apparently accepted by the tradition of men of Darby, Scofield and Chafer, that the multitude of Old Covenant Israel were broken off, and only the remnant accepted Christ and became part of remade Israel.

Those of remade Israel in Christ are all saved by Christ, and so Paul can make the statement that "And so all Israel shall be saved."

In Romans 11: 25 - "blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" - the translation of ethnos as Gentiles rather than as nations or peoples can help lead to the view that since blindness has happened to a part of Old Covenant Israel, that when "the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" then Old Covenant Israel will be saved.

In 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:" Here ethnos is translated as nations, not Gentiles.

Look at Matthew 24: 14, "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." Again, ethnos is translated as nations, not as Gentiles. It could be translated as peoples.

In Romans 11: 25 an important Greek word, achri is translated as until. This is Strong's Exhaustive Concordance number 891, which is said to mean "the idea of a terminus of time, as far as, until, to, while.

In Matthew 24: 14, the end or terminus of time is to occur when the Gospel has been preached to all nations or peoples.

If, by "the completeness of the nations is reached" in Romans 11: 25 refers to the end of the era of the Great Commission, then it makes little sense to see the blindness of the multitude of Old Covenant coming to an end and all of them being saved. Blindness of a part of Old Covenant Israel, from the perspective of the First Century, continues to the end of the Great Commission when the completeness of the nations is reached as far as salvation is concerned.

However, any individual alive now who wants to join remade Israel can do so on Christ's terms. Jesus Christ said "I am come that they might have life , and that they might have it more abundantly." John 10: 10 Christ is spiritual life. He is also "the way, the truth, and the life." You cannot make up some of your own doctrines and have Christ in you.

 

[Travis]

What Darby taught was chalk full of error. How Darby treated those who disagreed with his doctrinal fancies was chalk full of error.

I would take anything that originated from Darby and put it into quarantine for about 1290 years or so first just to be safe.