5 JWO_15_12_TheConsequencesofDispensationalIdeas_0088

embed edited this page 2023-10-27 23:31:08 +00:00

Table of Contents

• The Consequences of Dispensational Ideas

Parent: JesusWordsOnly

The Consequences of Dispensational Ideas

Dispensational theory has now drastically reduced the New Testament applicable to us. Our New Testament that applies after the ascension of Jesus is, in effect, only the words of Paul. We have now returned 100% to the position of the early heretic Marcion of 144 A.D. He said only Paul had the message of Jesus. He rejected the salvation message of the twelve apostles. Marcion claimed their gospels were at odds with Paul. He circulated a gospel narrative that had much in common with Luke, but was much shorter. (See Appendix B: How the Canon Was Formed JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112.)

It has taken almost nineteen-hundred years, but everything has come full circle back to Marcion's doctrine and his truncated gospel account. The early church branded him a heretic. Marcion was forgotten. The four gospels were later joined to canon. They appeared safely ensconced as valid until the rise of covenant theology and dispensationalism took over. By these doctrinal developments, we have come back to a Marcion heresy enveloping Christianity day by day.

These developments should disgust any true Christian. As John Mac Arthur correctly states about this aspect of Dispensationalism:

It is no wonder that the evangelistic message growing out of such
a system differs sharply from the gospel according to Jesus. If we
begin with the presupposition that much of Christ's message was
intended for another age, why should our gospel be the same as He
preached? 23

23. John Mac Arthur, The Gospel According to Jesus (Zondervan: 1994) at 33. MacArthur does not share my view of Paul. Instead, he tries valiantly to claim his view of Jesus' gospel is consistent with Paul. To do this, MacArthur argues that "repentance" (which Jesus preached) is no more a work than faith. However, because MacArthur defines repentance as "active submission" to Jesus {id., at 34, 113), it just cannot wash with Paul. I tried that path myself. 1 found Paul is just too plainspeaking. For example, in (Rom. 4:4), Paul says if salvation is by works then it would be by a "debt." Paul then clearly says in Romans 4:5: "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness." Clearly Paul is excluding all kinds of effort , including active submission. Paul thus eschews repentance from sin as part of salvation. By doing so, Paul clearly contradicts Jesus.