Rightly dividing the Bible

[Thunderian]

what must I believe about Jesus?

Start with that he died for your sins.

If so, that involves a lot of sometimes very complicated so called "Christological" doctrines which, to my view, are not always very simple or clear.

John 3:16 - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

That is the clear Christological doctrine. Everything else needs to follow that or it's bad doctrine.

Given that, as you have put it, belief and salvation are in this case correlated, if one has mistaken beliefs about Jesus can one rightly be called saved? I am just wondering.

Belief and salvation are in all cases correlated, despite what the universal reconciliationists would tell us.

The only disqualifying mistaken belief about Jesus is not actually believing in his death for the covering of your sins.

 

[Damien50]

Faith and logic don't need to go hand in hand, but the Bible needs to make some sort of consistent sense for it to be God's word.

Noting different dispensations is a way of marking the order and method of God's dealing with humanity in accordance with the way God himself lays it out in the Bible. It's a mystery how this can be so apparent to me and you and not to others.

Would you say faith leads to a spiritual wisdom that transcends logic?

When I learned about dispensationalism it made the entire bible come into context where identifying doctrines, historical events, characters, and clear lines were able to be made. It exposed general themes regarding our relationship with God, faith or lack of, and the individuality of all his believers from their sins to their righteousness. There are many things I will denounce as heresy, false, or just wrong but I found dispensationalism made the bible easier and thus my own spiritual journey a little less cloudy.

 

[Todd]

Faith and logic don't need to go hand in hand, but the Bible needs to make some sort of consistent sense for it to be God's word.

Noting different dispensations is a way of marking the order and method of God's dealing with humanity in accordance with the way God himself lays it out in the Bible. It's a mystery how this can be so apparent to me and you and not to others.

It's perspective. I recognize the different "time periods", I just don't believe that God chose to deal with people in a different manner for different periods of time.
Numbers 23:19 "God doesn't change his mind"
James 1:17 "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
Psalms 89:34 "My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips."
1 Peter 1:24-24 "For all flesh [is] as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you."

You see the differences in time periods of the Bible and assume God changed his way of dealing with man, where I see the differences and assume that man's understanding of God changed. Which is more reasonble to assume, that God would be inconsistent or man?

BTW, I do agree with you that ones position on dispensationalism is not an issue of salvation.

 

[Thunderian]

It's perspective. I recognize the different "time periods", I just don't believe that God chose to deal with people in a different manner for different periods of time.
Numbers 23:19 "God doesn't change his mind"
James 1:17 "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
Psalms 89:34 "My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips."
1 Peter 1:24-24 "For all flesh [is] as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you."

You see the differences in time periods of the Bible and assume God changed his way of dealing with man, where I see the differences and assume that man's understanding of God changed. Which is more reasonble to assume, that God would be inconsistent or man?

BTW, I do agree with you that ones position on dispensationalism is not an issue of salvation.

Of course God doesn't change, but that doesn't mean that once he's done things once one way he can't do them differently the next. The character of God remains unchanged, no matter how we are saved. That's not the issue at all.

According to the Bible, Christians cannot lose their salvation, but Old Testament saints could and did. If this is not a difference, what is it?

 

[_Armageddon_]

Of course God doesn't change, but that doesn't mean that once he's done things once one way he can't do them differently the next. The character of God remains unchanged, no matter how we are saved. That's not the issue at all.

According to the Bible, Christians cannot lose their salvation, but Old Testament saints could and did. If this is not a difference, what is it?

YOur missunderstanding-
You frogot there wasnt JC Always on Earth

 

[Todd]

Of course God doesn't change, but that doesn't mean that once he's done things once one way he can't do them differently the next.

I disagree. Yes he is capable of doing things differently, but he clearly says he won't. (See scriptures I mentioned above).

The character of God remains unchanged, no matter how we are saved. That's not the issue at all.

If Christ's blood wasn't neccesary for OT saints to be saved, then God had Jesus sacrifice himself for no reason. Why couldn't he just choose to continue to save us the old way? I mean Jesus even prayed if there be any other way let this cup pass, but obviously there wasn't another way, unless you think God ignored the prayers of Jesus. The answer is that the OT saints could not be saved without the blood of Jesus. The OT animal sacrifices had no power in themselves as they were simply prophetic shadows of what was to come. The OT Saints are not saved by a different mechanism. The only thing that is different in the OT and NT is the human understanding of the mechanism of salvation.

According to the Bible, Christians cannot lose their salvation, but Old Testament saints could and did. If this is not a difference, what is it?

Well I can't aruge that with you, because I don't believe in the premise that Christians can't loose their salvation and OT saints could. Really our definitions of salvation are too different to have this discussion.

 

[Thunderian]

I disagree. Yes he is capable of doing things differently, but he clearly says he won't. (See scriptures I mentioned above).

A different method of salvation doesn't mean that God's character has changed any more than having burgers for dinner tonight and lasagna tomorrow means my character has changed. God can do what he wants. The only thing he has promised in that regard is that he won't change who he is. I am unable to comprehend how that affects his chosen methods for salvation.

Really our definitions of salvation are too different to have this discussion.

Our definitions of scripture are why we look at salvation differently.

 

[Thunderian]

YOur missunderstanding-
You frogot there wasnt JC Always on Earth

Huh?

 

[_Armageddon_]

Huh?

Well...I think you missunterstood bible,since Jesus Christ was not on earth before the NT

 

[floss]

Well...I think you missunterstood bible,since Jesus Christ was not on earth before the NT

“He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”
‭‭Daniel‬ ‭3:25‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

[cfowen]

2 Timothy 2:15 - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.​

What does this verse mean to you?

This verse has been a mainstay for me for 30 years. I use it along with Phil 1:10, a verse that tells you generally how to use 2Tim 2:15. Phil 1:10 reads, "That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ." If you have a KJV with margin notes, you'll see that "approve things that are excellent" can read "try things that differ", where "try" means "test". So, to correctly divide the Word of truth (scripture), you must first test the things that differ. Right Division is the only way to avoid confusion and eliminate contradictions. Once you've tested the things that differ, you'll be able to approve the things that are more excellent, and then you can rightly divide the Word of Truth. Supposedly, the Bible abounds in contradictions, according to its unknowledgeable enemies. On the surface, that may be true. In reality, all the contradictions disappear when you apply the much-needed principle of Right Division to them.

For most all people that use these Biblical rules, one of the main thing that really needs rightly divided is the way God deals differently with Jews and Gentiles in His Word. Although not 100% correct, I am using the term Jew, not to mean a member of the tribe of Judah, but to mean a member of any of the 12 tribes of Israel, like it was done in the writings of Paul, THE Apostle for us Gentiles. Compare these 2 passages: Mt 19:16-17 and 1Cor 15:1-4.

Mt 19:16-17
16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments

1Cor 15:1-4
1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

In the 1st passage, Jesus Christ tells the man that, if he wants eternal life, to keep the commandments. In the 2nd, Paul says that, to be saved, a person must believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Assuming you are a Gentile in 2018, which is right for you? Further study will tell you that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision (the Jews). During His earthly ministry, He told the 12 in Mt 15:24, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." and in Mt 10:5, Jesus Christ commanded the 12, "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:" Also note that, in the first, Christ was still alive. Therefore, a gospel involving Christ's death, burial, and resurrection could not have possibly been preached while Christ was alive.

Jesus Christ's ministry was 100% to Israel, for the purpose of showing that He was the promised Messiah and, if they accepted Him, to return and bring in the promised earthy kingdom. On the other hand, Paul was the apostle, teacher, minister, and preacher to the Getiles, as proven in 10 different verses. So, which one do you pick? Christ or Paul. The answer is obvious. It is Paul. Don't forget that Jesus Christ is speaking the words of God. But Paul has been recieving special revelations from God and also is speaking the words of God. The words of both Christ and Paul are inspired. The black letters in the Bible are just as inspired (God-breathed) as the red letters. Keep studying and you'll also discover that the 12 apostles are ministers to Israel and not to Gentiles. The only record of any of the 12 preaching to Gentiles was Peter preaching to Cornelius in Acts 10. The only reason this happened was to pave the way for Paul's Gentile ministry. Every word in the Bible is important and is written for you, but only the letters from Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, have your name and address on the envelope and are written to you.

 

[Violette]

2 Timothy 2:15 - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.​

What does this verse mean to you?

This is sort of morbid but I think we’re supposed to rightly divide the Bible in the same way a medical student would dissect and study a body. Carefully examining each part but always considering how all parts relate as a whole.

 

[cfowen]

According to Strong's, "rightly divide" means to cut straight, or dissent correctly. I have seen elsewhere that it means, "to chop." In any case, it doesn't mean to pick and choose what you want to keep. Right division is an all or nothing chop. The main 2 things that need rightly divided are (1) Remove every rule written to Israel from our Gentile doctrine. When this is done, most so-called scriptural contradictions are eliminated (2) Separate Paul's writings to Gentiles of the past from his writings to present day Gentiles. In other words, remove from our doctrine his 1st 7 books, which were written during Acts (Rom, Gal, 1&2Thess, 1&2Cor, and Hebrews), Retain as present day doctrine only Paul's books written after Acts (Eph, Phil, Col, 1&2Tim, Titus, and Philemon). In other words, remove what was written to another group of people from our doctrine. If you can do this (it's very difficult, because all of us have lived falsely for years in the doctrine written during Acts), all the rest of so-called contradictions disappear. The Acts rapture is our greatest stumbling block. Only when we see it's for a past time and a past people and not for us today, can we start learning our Bibles. It took me about 20 years to quit dragging the Gospels and Acts doctrine into the truth for today, found only in Paul's last 7 books.

Anytime you find an alleged contradiction in scripture, it is usually due to your lack of rightly dividing the word of truth (in some cases, it can also be due to a bad Biblical interpretation of the Greek or Hebrew). God is not a liar and He isn't the author of confusion. There are NO real contradictions in scripture, period. Impossible.

 

[Daciple]

Samson is another Old Testament believer who lost God's spirit. He allowed his hair to be cut -- against the commandment of the Lord -- and the Holy Spirit left him. Clearly an element of works was involved in his relationship with God, just as it was for all Old Testament saints.

It's plain from scripture that New Testament believers are a separate class of believers. That means there are at least two different paths to salvation, both going through Jesus Christ but not by any means exactly the same route. And that, dear brothers and sisters, means there is a division in the Bible.

So do you believe Samson is in Hell? You must according to your statement here and then linking it with Salvation. There has always has been and always will be ONE method of Salvation and only one, you say here:

You need to show how I'm wrong, if you can.

Well lets see what Paul says about what brought the people of the Old Testament Salvation:

Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain,
5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death
7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise
11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed,
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac
20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau
21 By faith Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph
23 By faith Moses,
28 Through faith he kept the passover,
29 By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land
30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down
31 By faith the harlot Rahab perished not
32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:

Samson may have lost his power with God for disobedience, just as you and I can, but he clearly didnt lose his salvation as Paul mentions him right along side with all of the other Prophets and Great Fathers of the Faith in the Old Testament. In fact you mentioning Samson actually proves that it is ONE way to Salvation, as Paul details for us, by Faith and by Faith Alone....

Also we ought to pay attention to the end of Samsons life, what ended up happening?

Judges 16:28 And Samson called unto the Lord, and said, O Lord God, remember me, I pray thee, and strengthen me, I pray thee, only this once, O God, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes.
29 And Samson took hold of the two middle pillars upon which the house stood, and on which it was borne up, of the one with his right hand, and of the other with his left.
30 And Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. And he bowed himself with all his might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that were therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life.

So we see that Samson prays to the Lord to remember Him and the Lord answers his prayers and Samson in the end of his life with this one prayer ended up slaying more than all whom he slew in his life!!! Samson clearly wasnt Lost, he didnt lose his salvation, and he ended up praying and being heard by God!! No lost person is heard by God period unless it is a prayer for Salvation:

John 9:31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.

If Samson lost his Salvation which is what you are trying to say happened, then God would not have heard him, but He heard and answered immediately and ended up allowing Samson to do more in that final act of his life than all before. Samson is in Heaven right now, he is in the hall of Faith, and he proves that Salvation comes by one way, Faith thru Grace and not of works lest any man boast. It was the same for the Old Testament Saints as it is today, they simply were putting their Faith in the Coming Messiah and the Shadows and Types of Him represented in the Sacrifices and Temple, and we have the veil lifted and put our Faith in Christ the fulfillment of the Types and Shadows of the Old Testament...

Also Dispensationalism is bogus, could no one prior to 1800's not discern the Bible correctly? That MUST be what you are saying as Dispensationalism didnt exist until the 1800's. It was created by a guy name John Nelson Darby, who ended up creating what was basically his own Cult broken from the Plymouth Brethren called the Exclusive Brethren. I think if one is to truly hold this position then they ought to study this man and also account for how it is that the entire Church from the Foundation until the 1800's were not correctly interpreting the Bible. How are all these millions of believers, over these thousands of years wrong, but this one guy had it correct?

The fact is, he didnt have it right, he has it wrong, and it behooves those who are ingrained into this ideology to truly study the roots of this ideology, the man who created it and the way the Bible was discerned for 1000's of years prior to this guy coming on the scene...

 

[cfowen]

Daciple,

If you don't sacrifice animals according to the law, you are a dispensationalist

 

[Daciple]

Daciple,

If you don't sacrifice animals according to the law, you are a dispensationalist

Lol no I am not, again would you like to answer the questions I posed. Would you like to say that all Christians prior to John Nelson Darby were not able to properly discern or rightly divide the Word of God? Is it ONLY those who believe this Cult Leader that are able to rightly divide the Word of God? Unless your answer is yes all Christian from the Apostles till John Nelson Darby were not able to rightly divide the Word of God and only those who follow this Cult Leaders teaching can rightly discern the Word of God, then Dispensationalism as it is taught today is not the correct method of Rightly Dividing the Word of God...

 

[cfowen]

Definitely, until the 19th century, people did not know how to rightly divide God's word (2Tim 2:15 and Phil 1:10) and, therefore, it was impossible for them to be dispensationalists. The biggest problem was that they stupidly treated Paul as a usurper and they had no idea what a force he truly was.They focused on the Gospels, which, in reality, had little to do with us Gentiles

Paul, the only apostle to us Gentiles, the only author whose books directly apply to us Gentiles today, who wrote more than half of the NT books, was essentially forgotten until the 19th century. Many of the church fathers foolishly considered his books uninspired and dangerous. Except for the milky form of Acts 2 dispensationalism, which Darby, Larkin, and Scofield all wrongly pushed, all forms of dispensationalism correctly involve Paul's writings as key to their systems. The partial truth burdens of fundamentalism broke our backs until the higher level dispensationalism came along.

Paul is THE apostle to the Gentiles.The doctrine in his books take precedence over the doctrine taught in any other books in the Bible, including the Gospels. And, his last 7 books, written after Acts, when the Gentiles are no longer tied to Israel's apron strings, take precedence over his 1st 7 books, written during Acts when the believing Gentiles were grafted into Israel, the old olive tree.

And yes, you are a dispensationalist if you don't do the things commanded of Israelites. Dispensationalism is based on correctly dividing the Word of God (2Tim 2:15) into what applies to you and what doesn't apply to you, based on understanding the Bible as a whole. This all boils down to the fact that the last 7 books written by Paul (Eph, Phil, Col, 1&2Tim, Titus, Philemon) are the only books written directly TO us today. All books are true and are written FOR us. I like the red words as much as anyone but I know that they only directly involve Israel.

 

[Thunderian]

So do you believe Samson is in Hell? You must according to your statement here and then linking it with Salvation.

I believe Samson is in Heaven. There is no reason to think that the spirit of God, having left Samson, could not have returned to him if Samson humbled himself and turned to God. We know that he didn't cut his hair again, and clearly God heard him when he prayed his final prayer to the Lord, asking for strength. Plus, as you point out, Paul says Samson is counted as faithful.

But the Bible clearly says that the Lord was departed from him. This is a real problem if his salvation was the same as ours is today, because Jesus Christ promised us that his spirit would never depart from us.

Also Dispensationalism is bogus, could no one prior to 1800's not discern the Bible correctly? That MUST be what you are saying as Dispensationalism didnt exist until the 1800's. It was created by a guy name John Nelson Darby, who ended up creating what was basically his own Cult broken from the Plymouth Brethren called the Exclusive Brethren. I think if one is to truly hold this position then they ought to study this man and also account for how it is that the entire Church from the Foundation until the 1800's were not correctly interpreting the Bible. How are all these millions of believers, over these thousands of years wrong, but this one guy had it correct?

The fact is, he didnt have it right, he has it wrong, and it behooves those who are ingrained into this ideology to truly study the roots of this ideology, the man who created it and the way the Bible was discerned for 1000's of years prior to this guy coming on the scene...

I could not give a better rebuttal to your thoughts on dispensationalism than @cfowen gave, but I will say that you and those like you give old John Nelson Darby far too much credit. Rightly dividing the Bible goes back a long way, and Darby didn't invent anything that hasn't been around for as long as we've had the complete word of God.

 

[cfowen]

You're right about Darby, Thunderian. He and Scofield are pretty unimportant when it comes to Bible truth, although their doctrine contains more truth than any mainstream denomination. I've been a dispensationalist for 30 years and haven't read either of them. I have read a lot of Larkin, but only because he did great charts. His charts are probably the best ever done but, doctrinely, they are incomplete.

Somewhere, in the 50, or so, books I have on Acts 28 dispensationalism, there is an article that gives quotes of early Church fathers showing that 2 or 3 of them had, at least, a very vague idea of dispensationalism. If I happen to run across it, I'll post some of the quotes.

I realize that everyone believes that their beliefs are the true beliefs. If you search Google for the number of Christian denominations in the world, you'll run across a figure of 34,000. If you include spin-offs and use a very loose definition of what a denomination is, I would guess maybe that number could be valid. Most of these spin-offs pop up because of different interpretations of the scriptures. However, If God isn't a liar and if He is not the author of confusion, there can be no more than one correct answer for each question you could pose, concerning the scriptures. Praise God, most all denominations teach an acceptable way to salvation. However, the odds are great that your Church teaches little truth beyond that.

When I was saved, some 30 years ago, I saw that, if you were to ask the question, "What must I do to get saved?" to 5 preachers from 5 different denominations, you could get 5 completely different answers. This was abhorrent to me. This question is the basis for everything. I decided then and there that I would find a denomination or a teacher whose goal was to find out what the Bible actually said about everything. I am a chemist by profession and I have an analytical mind. I guess I took the scientific approach to this problem and found that right division, as demanded by scripture, is the only true Biblical way to discover the truth of the scriptures. The result was that there is no denomination that even approaches knowing the truth found in the scriptures.. Why? No mainstream denomination practices right division and, as a result, they all blend what was written to Israel with what was written to the Gentiles and end up with this big mish-mash of untruth. The best example is the so-called rapture, the resurrection of those Jews and Gentiles during Acts who believed in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is for a different people at a different time. Our equivalent of the rapture is the"appearing", found only in maybe 6 passages in Paul's last 7 books. The appearing is the 1st mass resurrection. The rapture is the second.

I once did a big drawing of "the mountain of scriptural knowledge", where all the saved people lived. I arranged them by denomination and the higher they were on the mountain, the more they understood scripture's truth. The Catholics were at the very bottom, of course, and some of them didn't even live on the mountain. Next up were the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, and the other milky denominations. A little higher were the Charismatics and, about in the middle, were the Baptists, who are definitely the most knowledgeable among the mainstream denominations, although that's not saying much. Barely above the Baptists are the Acts 2 dispensationalists. Next are the mid-Acts dispensationalists. Finally, at the pinnacle, are the Acts 28:28 dispensationalists. Of course, there are probably millions of individual exceptions within these ranks.

I only know of one Acts 28 dispensationalist that ever went backwards to a lesser form of knowledge. He was a preacher and his reason was probably that he couldn't make a living for his family preaching Ac28 - it takes a lot of guts for a person to switch to Ac28 - you essentially have to divorce yourself from the Churches. He couldn't go forward from Ac28 because there is nothing more advanced than Ac28. I've never known any Acts 28 dispensationalist that wasn't a scholar. Acts 28 dispensationalists KNOW, with no doubts, that they are the only ones at this pinnacle of knowledge. Others may think they know it all, but there's always a little doubt in the back of their minds. Act28ers aren't arrogant, they just know, period. Most Ac28ers, after converting, wonder why they hadn't seen the truth before. It's right there in black and white, mainly in Eph and Col, with no sleight of hand. Once you see it, it becomes so very obvious. The trick in seeing it is to eliminate everything you think you know from Acts and the Gospels, at least temporarily. Park your baggage outside the door.

And, the application of right division, 2Tim2:15, is the key to all Biblical truth and knowledge. Without it, you really know very little - a lot less than you think you do. I'm not trying to offend anyone. I just know that I know. Do you, with zero doubts, know that you know.?

 

[Daciple]

Definitely, until the 19th century, people did not know how to rightly divide God's word

SMH, seriously? Yeah brother I really dont think I can have a productive conversation with someone who thinks people removed by 2000 yrs have a more clear or the ONLY clear understanding of Scripture as opposed to those who lived with Jesus, lived with the Apostles, or knew and lived with those who lived with the Apostles. Do you also mistakenly believe that the Church not only can understand Scripture correctly now, as opposed to every Christian in existences prior to John Nelson Darby, but that the Church itself is functioning more properly? Because I can tell you it doesnt, just as Scripture has told us the exact opposite concerning how people will divide the Scriptures in the Future as opposed to the past...

2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Acts 20:29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

It is also interesting to know that during the same time that John Nelson Darby was creating this ideology and gathering together his own Cult, that many other Cults and False Teachers were bursting on the scene. William Miller, Ellen G White, Charles T Russell and Joseph Smith among others began their Cults. I think it is no coincidence that all these False Teachers came out at the same time, and JND can be lumped right in with them as well. Unfortunately he has been the most detrimental in my opinion as he has slowly but surely infected all of Christendom with is False Doctrine. Unlike Mormonism, SDA, Jehovah Witnesses and the like who have been clearly defined and been separated from the Church, this False Doctrine has completely ingrained itself into every aspect of the Church. Thanks to Scofield, and then Hal Lindseys Late Great Planet Earth and others it was injected into the thought of most of the Church. Its not clearly identified and rejected from the Church but the opposite, in fulfillment of Scripture, it has caused many to heap false teachers for their itchy ears and fleshly ideologies concerning Israel, completely destroying the True Understanding of Scripture and the relationship between Old and New Testament. You are the prime example with this constant ONLY 7 of the Books of the Bible are written for us and the other are for Jews nonsense. You deny clear Scripture that shows a FULFILLMENT of Old Testament Prophecies and then throw these clearly fulfilled Scriptures into a Future Date with a Restored Israel that is completely back tracking on the fulfillment of OT thru Christ. Its a convuluted mess in reality, but you sadly believe that you and people today have a better understanding of Scripture than the Saints of Old. That my friend is laughable...

The biggest problem was that they stupidly treated Paul as a usurper and they had no idea what a force he truly was.They focused on the Gospels, which, in reality, had little to do with us Gentiles

Paul, the only apostle to us Gentiles, the only author whose books directly apply to us Gentiles today, who wrote more than half of the NT books, was essentially forgotten until the 19th century. Many of the church fathers foolishly considered his books uninspired and dangerous.

Yeah right both of these statements are not true, first the Gospels in reality have everything to do with us, but unfortunately with this wholly incorrect made up doctrine of Dispensationalism you and those like you have completely undermined the importance and value of the Gospel AND the Old Testament in relation to how we understand the Entire Bible. Until one comes to understand the FACT that Israel is simply the Church veiled and that the there is only 2 different methods in which God has dealt with Humanity, the Old and the New Covenant then all you have is this chopping up of Scripture randomly applying something to the past, then present and then future REGARDLESS of the Scriptures that show that they clearly have been fulfilled, and end up with a system that is completely and totally defunct, random and contradictory.

Second to say that the Church Fathers believed Paul to be an usurper and to say that these books were forgotten until the 19th Century is just not true. Considering the FACT that as early as 170 AD there were Canons that included ALL of Pauls writings ( Muratorian Canon) and only excluded NON Pauline Scriptures ( Hebrews, James, and 3 John ) proves in and of itself that the Early Church definitely accepted and used Paul for their ideologies. The earliest of the Church Fathers quote Paul extensively, such as Clement of Rome who quoted from Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Hebrews, and Ignatius who quoted from Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, and Hebrews. You also have Polycarp the disciple of John who quotes from Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Hebrews. There is also contention that Justin Martyr quotes or at least calls to mind Paul in some of his writings, specifically Romans and Galatians. I could go on and on showing that since the beginning of the Church, the Earliest Church Fathers until whomever it is you want to bring up in the recent past ( Spurgeon, Wesley, Luther ect) all quote and base their ideologies off of Paul. You are just wrong for stating such a thing...

The doctrine in his books take precedence over the doctrine taught in any other books in the Bible, including the Gospels.

Wrong

And yes, you are a dispensationalist if you don't do the things commanded of Israelites.

Wrong again.

Dispensationalism is based on correctly dividing the Word of God (2Tim 2:15) into what applies to you and what doesn't apply to you, based on understanding the Bible as a whole.

Wrong for a third time. Because of this wrong train of thinking you are not able to properly discern the Old Testament and its wonderful precedent it ought to take in the Christians Life!!! Every aspect of the Bible is applied to me in some form or fashion, but trying to get you to understand this would take an extensively long time which I dont have nor do I have the interest in trying to after reading that last post. Heres the thing it will take God Himself revealing the errors of Dispensationalism, and Pre Millennialism and the horribly error prone Pre Tribulation Rapture (which I am going to go out on a branch and say you also mistakenly believe as well could be wrong here tho) just as God Himself had to reveal it to me in a rather miraculous way. I used to believe in Dispensationalism, in Pre Milennialism, in the Pre Trib Rapture but the more God has been laying on my heart to intensely study these things the more He has revealed the very real errors in these doctrines that those who hold them just overlook because they have been essentially brainwashed to ignore. Why do they ignore these glaring contradictions? Because to look at them deeply will cause them to reexamine their entire Eschatology which most people really do not want to do so they reject the glaring contradictions and make up other all together incorrect ideologies to nullify the cognitive dissonance they face when looking directly at these inherent problems.

I like the red words as much as anyone but I know that they only directly involve Israel.

So wrong, cant even begin to dissect the horrible error in this statement, I hope no one follows you in your incorrect train of thought seen here, Jesus Words are spoken directly to me, I cant imagine reading the Words of our Lord and Savior and think eh they really dont apply to me, that breaks my heart for you...

Somewhere, in the 50, or so, books I have on Acts 28 dispensationalism, there is an article that gives quotes of early Church fathers showing that 2 or 3 of them had, at least, a very vague idea of dispensationalism.

So what does that really say? In the 50 books you have read to support your false ideologies we can see that the Early Church didnt actualy support it, and that my friend is very telling and a major reason why I hope others follow suit and reject Dispensationalism, because the people who wrote the Bible, the people who walked with Jesus, the people who knew the people who knew Jesus and those who knew them, didnt believe in this ideology. The fact is, this is a foreign concept to the Church and according to Paul:

2 Thes 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

I will continue to stand fast and hold to the traditions which have been taught to me by Paul, the Apostles and those who lived and knew them all vs some guy in the 1800's who creates a new doctrine, then a cult and infects the Church with it, or some guy on a website 2000 yrs later trying to tell me to accept something none of these people believed or taught. No thanks fella...

If God isn't a liar and if He is not the author of confusion, there can be no more than one correct answer for each question you could pose, concerning the scriptures.

Amen, Dispensationalism would not be the correct answer, and to think the Billions of Christians in all the past were incorrect is insanity. Since Paul didnt teach this nor any of the Apostles you would like to elevate yourself above them in their understanding of all these things. God would definitely be the author of confusion to believe that you or some tiny % of all Christians now 2000 yrs later are the only ones who can or are able to understand Scriptures as opposed to IDK the Apostles or those who knew the Apostles or the Early Church. Utter nonsense...

The result was that there is no denomination that even approaches knowing the truth found in the scriptures..

Except your newly created denomination of Acts 28 dispensationalists right? Lol absurd...

The appearing is the 1st mass resurrection. The rapture is the second.

Lol no already showing you have little Biblical Discernment but showing you the errors of your ways would be fruitless as only your sect of Christianity is able to truly discern the Bible. Just like Darby, or Joseph Smith, or Ellen G White, or Charles T Russell...

I once did a big drawing of "the mountain of scriptural knowledge"

Good thing your opinion means nothing, I would say if you hold to Dispensationalism you probably havent studied the Truth apart from this contradictory system of confusion...

you essentially have to divorce yourself from the Churches.

Because THAT sounds like what Jesus wants you to do!! Divorce yourself from Him, again utter nonsense you are trying to tell others to accept here...

I've never known any Acts 28 dispensationalist that wasn't a scholar.

Oh great even more Elitism lol right so lets see you have to be born after lets say idk when did your cult start? Past 30 years or so? AND you have to be a scholar, wonderful lol So are you implying that in order to BE in this Cult you have to be a Scholar or that all Scholars will be joining your Cult? Haha this is rich brother...

Act28ers aren't arrogant,

If you are the example then yes sir definitely arrogant, extremely arrogant...

Do you, with zero doubts, know that you know.?

I have zero doubt that Dispensationalism is wrong, not one tiny little bit of doubt, it is wholly incorrect and it leads to so many errors in understanding Scripture it isnt even funny. And apparently your newer Cult version of it also is breeding massive egotism and arrogance, this I also know without a doubt. No thanks brother I am good on your Elitist Snobbery. Enjoy believing you are much more knowledgable than every Christian before you. Pride before the fall my friend but what would that matter to you, clearly you are above all, maybe even Paul and Jesus!!!