Chart of Dispensations - "Conscience"

[newbeliever02072005]

1Co 1:15 Lest3363 any5100 should say2036 that3754 I had baptized907 in1519 mine own1699 name.3686
1Co 1:16 And1161 I baptized907 also2532 the3588 household3624 of Stephanas:4734 besides,3063 I know1492 not3756 whether I baptized any1536, 907 other.243

1Co 1:17 For1063 Christ5547 sent649 me3165 not3756 to baptize,907 but235 to preach the gospel:2097 not3756 with1722 wisdom4678 of words,3056 lest3363 the3588 cross4716 of Christ5547 should be made of none effect.2758

1Co 1:18 For1063 the3588 preaching3056 of(3588) the3588 cross4716 is2076 to them that perish622 (3303) foolishness;3472 but1161 unto us2254 which3588 are saved4982 it is2076 the power1411 of God.2316



I was in church service last night and they were going over the "Chart of Dispensations" There are 7 of them. Innocence, Conscience, Human Government, Promise of Family, Law, Grace & Kingdom.

While they were discussing the "Conscience" one, the above scripture was used to describe it. The word pre-eminence was used. I was lost and really didn't grasp what they were talking about. I was hoping to give you the bits of info I have so that I could get some idea of what this particular dispensation is.

Thanks!
Newbeliever :)

[DeaconDean]

Is this what you are looking for?

Here is a link to a few more: http://members.citynet.net/morton/charts.htm or
http://www.ebccnet.com/lcharts/
Here is complete list of all his charts, some available on line and others have to be ordered: http://www.larkinestate.com/Charts/chartlist.html

Or was it this one:
http://www.ebccnet.com/albums/redrawn-b-w-charts/failure_of_man_bw.sized.jpg (http://www.ebccnet.com/lcharts/redrawn-b-w-charts/failure_of_man_bw?full=1)
http://members.citynet.net/morton/images/history.gif
http://members.citynet.net/morton/images/ldispen.gif

[arunma]

Question: is it true that dispensationalism proports that Jews can be saved without specifically receiving Jesus as their Lord (by this I mean that they may not simply have faith in an unnamed messiah, but that they must receieve the Christ who has already been named)? I've always thought that dispensationalism supports this doctrine, which is one major reason that I don't believe in it.

Not trying to start a debate or anything...unless someone wants to.

[carmi]

Question: is it true that dispensationalism proports that Jews can be saved without specifically receiving Jesus as their Lord

:scratch:
I never heard about that.

Was the context you heard this - OT salvation?

[arunma]

:scratch:
I never heard about that.

Was the context you heard this - OT salvation?

I've heard about it in multiple places. My pastor once gave a sermon on two-covenant theology, when he explained why it is actually anti-semitic to claim that Jews can be saved without receieving Jesus (obviously this source would have an anti-dispensationalism bias). I also happen to know that many TV preachers, such as John Hagee, believe in salvation for Christ-rejecting Jews. Of course, TV preachers have a lot of other problems with their theology, so maybe my information on dispensationalism isn't true. I certainly hope it isn't.

[FreeinChrist]

Question: is it true that dispensationalism proports that Jews can be saved without specifically receiving Jesus as their Lord (by this I mean that they may not simply have faith in an unnamed messiah, but that they must receieve the Christ who has already been named)? I've always thought that dispensationalism supports this doctrine, which is one major reason that I don't believe in it.

Not trying to start a debate or anything...unless someone wants to.

No, dispensationism does not teach that Jews are saved without receiving Christ. Instead, the belief is that during the Tribulation the 1/3 remnant (the 1/3 to come through the fire) come to believe in Christ, as in "look unto the one they had pierced" and THEN the Second coming will occur.
No one is saved without believing in Christ.

[FreeinChrist]

I've heard about it in multiple places. My pastor once gave a sermon on two-covenant theology, when he explained why it is actually anti-semitic to claim that Jews can be saved without receieving Jesus (obviously this source would have an anti-dispensationalism bias). I also happen to know that many TV preachers, such as John Hagee, believe in salvation for Christ-rejecting Jews. Of course, TV preachers have a lot of other problems with their theology, so maybe my information on dispensationalism isn't true. I certainly hope it isn't.

I have read Hagee's books (though I don't really like him) and did not see that he taught Jews were saved if they rejected Christ.

There are probably some who beleive that the Jew who worships God and is killed for being Jewish might be saved for dying for the testimony of God - I don't know.

[arunma]

No, dispensationism does not teach that Jews are saved without receiving Christ. Instead, the belief is that during the Tribulation the 1/3 remnant (the 1/3 to come through the fire) come to believe in Christ, as in "look unto the one they had pierced" and THEN the Second coming will occur.
No one is saved without believing in Christ.

Well, as long as salvation is only by faith in Jesus Christ, to the exclusion of any other means, I suppose I don't have a problem with dispensationalism. That said, I still disagree with it because it lacks the theodicy of covenant theology. I would argue that the church of Christ has always existed, and will continue to exist until the return of Christ.

After all, the Gospel was preached to both Adam and Eve when they disobeyed God. Thus it shows that even the first humans were Christians in the sense that they had faith in the promise of a Christ who was to come. Paul told the Galatians that the Gospel was preached to Abraham when he was told that through his offspring, the world would be redeemed. Paul also tells the Ephesians that Christians are part of the commonwealth of Israel. Now, it is possible to identify seven covenants in the Bible, but I think that all of these covenants were made with God's Israel, and that they all point to the New Covenant in Christ. It seems to limit the glory of Christ for us to say that there are seven dispensations, only one of which is the church.

Well, just my thoughts on the matter. Tell me if I've misunderstood dispensationalism.

[carmi]

It seems to limit the glory of Christ for us to say that there are seven dispensations, only one of which is the church.

Well, just my thoughts on the matter. Tell me if I've misunderstood dispensationalism.

Only one is called the church - that's how I understand it.

Another one is called the law ... that does not mean that now - in this dispensation - the law does not apply. God's commandments still stand and we are to keep them.

[daveleau]

I love Larkin's charts. I don't totally agree with him, but the scholarship that went into those is astounding.

Dispensationalism (strict dispensationalism) claims that only the epistles apply to us today. The Law in no way applies to us. This is where I tend to disagree with strict dispensationalism, and hold a very moderate dispensational belief (I believe God has a progressive treatment with Man, which this progression is the foundation of Dispensationalism, but that the moral aspects of the Law still apply). It was my understanding that the Dispensation of Conscience was where Man was conscious of sin, just after the Fall, and had no real way to reconcile Himself with God. Although, my understanding of this is limited, to say the least.

[DeaconDean]

kudos to u daveleau. i too like larkins charts. Plus I was given five charts by a "William Schout" that parallel Larkins. Similar but different. Although they are wrong in some areas, they do help shed light in other areas. They make great study helps. And I too am in a little way Dispensational too. I agree that there are definate dispensations that can be seen in time. God did not treat all men the same during various periods of time. A new law(s) were added by Him as needed according as the need arisen. But I also state that where most dispensationalist separate Israel and Gentile, I do not. "For there will be one Shepherd, and one flock."

[arunma]

Only the epistles apply to us? What about the Gospel? I've always seen the epistles as the apostles' teaching about the Gospel. They make no sense apart from the Gospel, so I wonder how we could even begin to understand the epistles if we didn't know that the Gospel applied to us.

[JPPT1974]

Only one is called the church - that's how I understand it.

Another one is called the law ... that does not mean that now - in this dispensation - the law does not apply. God's commandments still stand and we are to keep them.

Yeah I read that too.
That is what and how I understand too!
God's commandments do still stand.
We are to keep them no matter how hard they are.
His ways should be our ways.