As a Baptist & Mid-Acts Dispensationalist I am very pleased with this new book and this interview. Praise the Triune God for His purposes in Israel and The Mystery of the Body of Christ!
@@andrewmorgensen326 it’s only to clarify what positions I hold as a Christian, so that my commendation of this video can be associated with the position that I hold. It’s good to see brothers & sisters of different positions commending one video which all the more testifies to the truthfulness of the video.
@@SimplyProtestantBibleBeliever 😊 right, I understand that. But why the need to express "what other positions you hold" why is that what you choose to express? Why do so many Christians need to be known by their associations? Why not just be a Christian known by the truth of what is spoken regardless of one's position or association. As a Christian, I've just never understood that.
@@andrewmorgensen326I agree with you about Christians and labels. I previously held the same sentiment also towards dispensationalist interpretation. For me its not really a matter of defining myself in that way that I am concerned with. Rather what makes a difference are the benefits of holding right doctrine. To me dispensationalism is about doctrine. I find that a major example for me personally is the doctrine of eternal security. If another interpretation leads to remaining unsure regarding this, than the Christian is robbed of joy and peace in their mind even if they are born again and thus eternally saved.
@@audiodrink I also believe in eternal security. Romans 8:38-39, and Matt 24:13 are good verses on that. But you don't have to be a dispensational to trust in God's saving power, in God faithfulness even if we fail, in an eternal security. It just makes no sense to me why people choose to brand themselves as "dispensationalists" "Catholics" "Mormons" "reformed" covenantalist" "liberal theologians" etc... Just be a "Christian". A little Christ. Or Christ-like. A follower of Jesus. The Bible even says this! 1st Cor 3:3-5 "Why are you acting like mere men, and following Paul, Cephas, Apollos,... Luther, Calvin, Augustine, Aquinas, Darby, Smith, Wesley, Edwards, Spurgeon, etc.etc.etc. are they not mere men!?'
Great interview. I am so happy these guys and this book is getting visibility. I particularly appreciated the discussion about ecclesiology and the alleged “fall” of dispensationalism in the academy. It seems to me that dispensationalism has never been a movement that is rooted in the academy but one rooted in the pew. The literal hermeneutic makes this accessible to anyone who reads their Bible. Non-dispensationalism views have to be “taught out” of the church. What do you think?
I just revisited The Epistle of Barnabas since you unhappily were inaccurate when you mentioned it. It actually has the following accents: we need to be on guard so as not to be deceived when the dark one is manifested! It claims that one covenant ended pretty much as soon as it began and it has definitely ended with “The Lord’s Covenant”. The land of milk and honey also is spiritualized as entering into this covenant. Not a land. No Temple either will God approve. He is not overly trinitarian to the point that it is tritheism - he is trinitarian but God as one was involved in the birth and cross event also somehow. Also there is atonement at the cross but emphasis as usual with early church writings is that it is a Christus Victor theology and atonement. Works are important too, and although the disciples are “sinners” and rely on God’s grace; our actions and righteous in life matters as “we hope to be saved” - even as we lovingly and joyfully wait in hope. Sounds very different don’t you think. Very Biblical and “Christian” though. Even if the writer makes mistakes - if he does - I’d rather go with him…. And ireaneaus, and mellitus, and Hippolytus etc etc than yourself or Darby. I dislike your doctrine because it can’t be seen in the army church and it leads to some of the biggest violent ignorance on this planet. Think about it.
Enjoyed the interview. Would rather have heard dispensationalism referred to as a framework contrasted against a theological 'system,' as those systems connected to the Roman Catholic kingdom now theology, imo. Corey didn't offer anything more than what James stated (see his boredom looking around at 30:56), but you can see he relishes the spotlight, so it can benefit some audiences to repeat these matters. Great job pointing out the straw man arguments too. It certainly speaks volumes to include a contribution from a pure biographer to strengthen the veracity of the thesis. Solid contribution, guys.
Why do you have to have a "system"?? Why not just be a Christian? Why are you a dispensationalists, or covenantalist or fundamentalist? Why do you have to use a system of thought? And not just read and understand the Bible and it's passages of content based on their respective contexts and content? Why do you follow Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Calvin, Luther, Darby, Augustine .. ect ... Learn the meaning of this: do not go beyond what is written...
@@DoTheology Has he really? Why do you think that? How do you know? How do you know "your prescribed" system is any more right or Godly than the Calvinists system or the Wesleyan's system or the Catholics system, ect. How do you know/reason we are to indeed have a system such a described above? Are these not mere traditions handed down by men, (mark7:9-13) and which have an appearance of wisdom and are based on the principals of the world? Was not Christ's Way, indeed a way and not a system or tradition? And was His Way not the way of love, and faith and righteousness, being eager to do good? As something distinct, though not contrary, to a philosophical or theological system which depends on human traditions and the basic principals of the world? (Col. 2:8) I suppose there must be factions/divisions among Christians, (1Cor 11:19) but are we not acting like mere men with unspiritual minds when such factions emerge (1Cor 3:1-5)? For we have gone beyond what is written in the scriptures and taken pride in one man or "system" over others by speculating on this or that doctrine and perspective? (1Cor 4:6) Were we not supposed to put these childish ways behind us and move on to greater, and simpler things? Becoming children again and not puffing ourselves up with idle notions,.or meaningless talk of genealogies and controversies that result in quarrels and constant fractions? (1Tim 1:6, 4:1-6, 6:4-5) If we "promote" anything why not promote Christ?! Why not promote his Way of Love? (2nd Cor 4:5, 1st Cor 2:2, 8:12, Acts 5:42, 24:14)
With all respect that was not an accurate way of explaining dispensationalism you know we have to respect the audience in with Jesus was talking to for instance when he said this generation he was referring to the people that he was addressing to first of all when Jesus is talking about all this Christianity did not exist yet and it's not talking about this 1948 Israelis from the old Covenant Israel that Christ was talking to
As a Baptist & Mid-Acts Dispensationalist I am very pleased with this new book and this interview.
Praise the Triune God for His purposes in Israel and The Mystery of the Body of Christ!
As a... Christian....
"Why identity by another name? By another system?..."
@@andrewmorgensen326 it’s only to clarify what positions I hold as a Christian, so that my commendation of this video can be associated with the position that I hold. It’s good to see brothers & sisters of different positions commending one video which all the more testifies to the truthfulness of the video.
@@SimplyProtestantBibleBeliever 😊 right, I understand that. But why the need to express "what other positions you hold" why is that what you choose to express?
Why do so many Christians need to be known by their associations? Why not just be a Christian known by the truth of what is spoken regardless of one's position or association.
As a Christian, I've just never understood that.
@@andrewmorgensen326I agree with you about Christians and labels. I previously held the same sentiment also towards dispensationalist interpretation. For me its not really a matter of defining myself in that way that I am concerned with. Rather what makes a difference are the benefits of holding right doctrine. To me dispensationalism is about doctrine. I find that a major example for me personally is the doctrine of eternal security. If another interpretation leads to remaining unsure regarding this, than the Christian is robbed of joy and peace in their mind even if they are born again and thus eternally saved.
@@audiodrink I also believe in eternal security. Romans 8:38-39, and Matt 24:13 are good verses on that.
But you don't have to be a dispensational to trust in God's saving power, in God faithfulness even if we fail, in an eternal security.
It just makes no sense to me why people choose to brand themselves as "dispensationalists" "Catholics" "Mormons" "reformed" covenantalist" "liberal theologians" etc...
Just be a "Christian". A little Christ. Or Christ-like. A follower of Jesus.
The Bible even says this! 1st Cor 3:3-5
"Why are you acting like mere men, and following Paul, Cephas, Apollos,... Luther, Calvin, Augustine, Aquinas, Darby, Smith, Wesley, Edwards, Spurgeon, etc.etc.etc. are they not mere men!?'
Thanks! Great discussion.
Looking forward to reading the book!
Thank you for this wonderful interview. It is very informative.
Great interview. I am so happy these guys and this book is getting visibility. I particularly appreciated the discussion about ecclesiology and the alleged “fall” of dispensationalism in the academy. It seems to me that dispensationalism has never been a movement that is rooted in the academy but one rooted in the pew. The literal hermeneutic makes this accessible to anyone who reads their Bible. Non-dispensationalism views have to be “taught out” of the church. What do you think?
Good interview.
I just revisited The Epistle of Barnabas since you unhappily were inaccurate when you mentioned it. It actually has the following accents: we need to be on guard so as not to be deceived when the dark one is manifested! It claims that one covenant ended pretty much as soon as it began and it has definitely ended with “The Lord’s Covenant”. The land of milk and honey also is spiritualized as entering into this covenant. Not a land. No Temple either will God approve. He is not overly trinitarian to the point that it is tritheism - he is trinitarian but God as one was involved in the birth and cross event also somehow. Also there is atonement at the cross but emphasis as usual with early church writings is that it is a Christus Victor theology and atonement. Works are important too, and although the disciples are “sinners” and rely on God’s grace; our actions and righteous in life matters as “we hope to be saved” - even as we lovingly and joyfully wait in hope. Sounds very different don’t you think. Very Biblical and “Christian” though. Even if the writer makes mistakes - if he does - I’d rather go with him…. And ireaneaus, and mellitus, and Hippolytus etc etc than yourself or Darby. I dislike your doctrine because it can’t be seen in the army church and it leads to some of the biggest violent ignorance on this planet. Think about it.
Dispensationalism exists to support Zionism, which is unbiblical partiality. Salvation for ALL people is through Christ in the new covenant.
Enjoyed the interview. Would rather have heard dispensationalism referred to as a framework contrasted against a theological 'system,' as those systems connected to the Roman Catholic kingdom now theology, imo. Corey didn't offer anything more than what James stated (see his boredom looking around at 30:56), but you can see he relishes the spotlight, so it can benefit some audiences to repeat these matters. Great job pointing out the straw man arguments too. It certainly speaks volumes to include a contribution from a pure biographer to strengthen the veracity of the thesis. Solid contribution, guys.
Why do you have to have a "system"??
Why not just be a Christian? Why are you a dispensationalists, or covenantalist or fundamentalist?
Why do you have to use a system of thought? And not just read and understand the Bible and it's passages of content based on their respective contexts and content?
Why do you follow Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Calvin, Luther, Darby, Augustine .. ect ...
Learn the meaning of this: do not go beyond what is written...
Because God has revealed a system (or, "program") for history, theology, and living
@@DoTheology Has he really? Why do you think that? How do you know? How do you know "your prescribed" system is any more right or Godly than the Calvinists system or the Wesleyan's system or the Catholics system, ect. How do you know/reason we are to indeed have a system such a described above? Are these not mere traditions handed down by men, (mark7:9-13) and which have an appearance of wisdom and are based on the principals of the world?
Was not Christ's Way, indeed a way and not a system or tradition? And was His Way not the way of love, and faith and righteousness, being eager to do good? As something distinct, though not contrary, to a philosophical or theological system which depends on human traditions and the basic principals of the world? (Col. 2:8)
I suppose there must be factions/divisions among Christians, (1Cor 11:19) but are we not acting like mere men with unspiritual minds when such factions emerge (1Cor 3:1-5)? For we have gone beyond what is written in the scriptures and taken pride in one man or "system" over others by speculating on this or that doctrine and perspective? (1Cor 4:6)
Were we not supposed to put these childish ways behind us and move on to greater, and simpler things? Becoming children again and not puffing ourselves up with idle notions,.or meaningless talk of genealogies and controversies that result in quarrels and constant fractions? (1Tim 1:6, 4:1-6, 6:4-5)
If we "promote" anything why not promote Christ?! Why not promote his Way of Love? (2nd Cor 4:5, 1st Cor 2:2, 8:12, Acts 5:42, 24:14)
With all respect that was not an accurate way of explaining dispensationalism you know we have to respect the audience in with Jesus was talking to for instance when he said this generation he was referring to the people that he was addressing to first of all when Jesus is talking about all this Christianity did not exist yet and it's not talking about this 1948 Israelis from the old Covenant Israel that Christ was talking to
23:00 your lies are the interruption your fake parenthesis that is not even in the Bible