Grace Believers and "Practical Application"

      It has been my experience that many "Grace" preachers and teachers have a tendency to discount the value of practical application of the Scripture.  I think much of this comes from the fact that most teaching and preaching today is only practical with no doctrinal teaching.  In order to correct this error of no doctrine at all, the "Grace" preacher/teacher has often over corrected in taking the position that only doctrinal teaching/preaching is needed.  

     I am going to try and leave out my opinion on this issue, but try to answer this strictly from the Bible rightly divided.  As right dividers how does our Apostle Paul answer the issue of practical application versus doctrine?  First of all the most import issue according to Paul is doctrine.  Consider 2 Tim 3:

[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
[17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Note in verse 16 above the first thing said about the Scripture is that it is for doctrine.  Therefore, doctrine is more important than practical application.  Note, however, that the Scripture is also given for practical issues such as "instruction in righteousness."  For the man of God to be perfect (complete), then he must have both doctrine and practical application (see verse 17 above).  You can not be complete with only doctrine.  Also, you can not be complete with only practical application.

     So what example did Paul leave "Grace" preachers/teachers to follow?  If we examine the Pauline Epistles most of them begin discussing doctrinal issues, and then towards the end practical application is made.  For one example, consider the book of Romans.  Mainly Romans 1-11 deals with doctrinal matters. At Romans 12 and going through chapter 16 Paul mainly focuses on practical matters.  Doing simple math the book of Romans is 68.75 percent doctrinal and 31.25 percent practical.  This same ratio might not hold true on all Paul's writings but the pattern of preaching/teaching both doctrine and practice will hold true.

Was Paul Acts 2, Mid Acts, Acts 28 or None of the Above?

      Among Dispensationalists and Right Dividers the battle lines have been drawn between the Acts 2, Mid Acts, and Acts 28 Dispensational positions.  Since most Right Dividers agree that Paul is our apostle, I would like to ask, "Does Paul ever take a hard line dispensational position?"  From my study in Acts and Paul's epistles I never see Paul demanding someone draw a line at Acts 2, Acts 9 or 13, Acts 20, or Acts 28.  The book of Acts is progressive revelation all the way through to Acts 28.  Since Paul did not write all his epistles during Acts, the progression of revelation continued even after Acts 28.  In light of this I do not think God expects Right Dividers to draw a hard line anywhere in the book of Acts.  As most of you know from previous blog posts I take the position Paul knew about the "Gospel of the Grace of God" at least by Acts 20.  However, I see nowhere in the book of Acts Paul explaining the "Mystery of the One Body of Christ" composed of Jew and Gentile without distinction.  I do not see a thorough explanation until after Acts 28 in Ephesians and Colossians.   Although I concede that the "Mystery" of Romans 16:25 probably refers to the Jew and Gentile in the One Body of Christ, it is not explained until after Acts 28, in our King James Bible until Ephesians and Colossians.  I do not agree with Bullinger and other Acts 28ers that Romans 16:25 was added later.  In light of all this I would say Paul was "None of the Above" when it comes to the Acts 2, Mid Acts, and Acts 28 positions.  I think the reason for this is because, based on my study of Acts, Israel is given an opportunity to accept the Kingdom Offer at least until the end of Acts.  Based on Paul's earlier epistles it seems that Paul was expecting Israel to "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; (Acts 3:19 KJV) during his lifetime. 

     In hindsight, now that we know Israel rejected the Kingdom Offer all the way through the book of Acts, we can now look back in the book of Acts and see how God was transitioning some things in His foreknowledge (concerning Israel's rejection of the Kingdom) preparing and forming the Mystery of the One Body of Christ concurrently with Israel's Kingdom Offer.  I think some in seeing these transitions/preparations at different places in Acts erroneously draw a hard dispensational line and dare their fellow believer to cross at their own risk of being removed from the "fellowship."

      I would conclude with "...be at peace among yourselves."(1 Thes 5:13).

Grace Believers and Easter

     The grace believers Biblical guide regarding observing or not observing "days" is found at Col 2:16

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days"

    Easter Sunday will be here on March 31, 2024.  I do not know of any believer (even those that fail to rightly divide) that thinks bunnies or eggs have anything to do with the resurrection of Christ.  However, you will hear a bunch of "Christians" and preachers complaining about bunnies and eggs as if there is some great emergency going on in the "church" because of this.  I hate to say this but you will even hear Grace Believers carried away with this nonsensical complaining.  My position is that although these traditions are pagan in origin nobody is equating these things with the resurrection of Christ.  Simply put kids just think it is fun to hunt eggs and eat chocolate bunnies.  When I was a kid I hunted eggs and ate chocolate bunnies, not because I wanted to worship some false god named "Ishtar," but because I wanted to find the prize egg and eat candy. I never knew who "Ishtar" was until I was a grown man and heard people complaining about parents allowing their kids to worship this false god by hunting eggs etc.  I can understand all the denominational preachers and "Christians" getting caught up in all the complaining about "Easter," but I don't understand the Grace Believers doing so?  These complaints are simply a form of legalism that Paul spoke of in Col 2:21 ( Touch not; taste not; handle not;). If you do not want your kids eating candy eggs or chocolate bunnies, then it is your right as a parent to forbid it.  However, I do not appreciate my liberty in Christ to allow my children fun at Easter to be equated with the worship of "Ishtar."  

     The answer to the question of Easter eggs and bunnies should be settled like Grace Believers claim to settle all other matters.  Consider what our apostle (Paul) has to say about such matters!  I know of one deceased grace preacher that used to say you could not be a "Mid Acts King Jame Bible-Believing Pauline Dispensationalist" if you took part in things like Easter, Christmas, etc.  My question to those that share this conviction is where in Paul's writings do you find such teaching?  The answer is "nowhere."  My position on Easter eggs and bunnies is based on what our apostle says in 1 Corinthians 8:4-8:

[4] As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.
[5] For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
[6] But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
[7] Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
[8] But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.

     Did you get what Paul just said above?  He says you can eat food even if it was offered in a worship service to an idol!  No food or lack of food under grace commends us to God.  We are not better or worse spiritually based on our diet.  In light of this scripture I take the position my children and I can eat Easter eggs and bunnies because we do not eat them as a thing offered to an idol, "Ishtar," but we eat them for enjoyment.The same is true of Halloween Candy and Christmas Candy!  

 

Mid Acts Right Division's Inconsistent Position on Paul's Practice of Water Baptism

      Most Mid Acts Dispensationalists say water baptism has no place in the age of grace.  When did the dispensation of grace begin?  Mid Acts Dispensationalists (MAD for short) answer this question with either Acts 9 or Acts 13.  The MAD position is Paul got saved, preached only grace according to the revelation of the mystery, and never entertained the idea that Israel could still believe and receive the kingdom after Acts 9 or 13.  So the question is, how could Paul continue to practice a water baptism for the remission of sins under a grace gospel according to the revelation of the mystery?  The correct answer is he could not.  

     Mid Acts Dispensationalists, in order to get consistent, must either admit Paul  practiced a symbolic water baptism under the dispensation of grace or they can change their position on when the dispensation of grace starts.  The MAD would have to move the start of "grace" from Acts 9 or 13 to some chapter in Acts after Paul's last recorded water baptism.  The earliest start time would be Acts 19 or 20.  

     I can think of two other options for the MAD.  Number one, reject the MAD position altogether and become an Acts 28 Dispensationalist like E W Bullinger did.  This allows all water baptisms in Acts to be Kingdom related and not Dispensation of Grace related.  The only other choice I see is teach that during the entire book of Acts God allowed an overlap of the Kingdom Program in which Israel could still repent and receive the Kingdom while many believed Paul's grace gospel and became part of the "fellowship of the mystery."