Practical Implications of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism

[kabozel]

I have been following the "Pauline Dispensationalism" thread for quite some time now, and instead of derailing that thread, I wanted to start a new one with a little bit of a different purpose than pure theological debate. I am especially interested in the comments of those who disagree with the extra division in scripture that Mid-Acts dispensationalists make.

My question is as follows: What are the practical implications of adhering to Mid-Acts dispensational theology for the believer? I am especially interested in negative implications (i.e. how would it hinder a believer's maturation process).

My motive behind this thread is as follows: My current understanding of the Bible is as an Acts 2 (sometimes called "traditional") dispensationalist. Unfortunately, I have not found any churches of this ilk in my town. However, we do have a Mid-Acts dispensational congregation....and I attended this church for eight months. As I came to learn more about this system of theology, I developed a couple of concerns that caused me to pull away from this congregation....at least for a time. These concerns are:

1. The pastor at this congregation seems to have an unhealthy obsession with water baptism....that is, he is totally against it. His obsession with water baptism seems to be equal to the obsession of the Campbellites (though in an opposite way).

2. The pastor does not believe that miracles are occurring today in any way. No healings.....nothing. They pray for God to give the sick person an extra measure of strength and grace to endure, but they don't pray for an actual healing.

3. The pastor seems to spend a bit too much time being concerned with the beliefs of other denominations.


On the other hand, there are many positive things about this congregation:

1. Lots of excellent Bible study...in fact, they go through the entire Bible every two years.

2. A very mature and loving body of believers. They support each other tremendously in time of need and have a real love of the Word.

3. I completely agree with their teachings on eschatology, salvation, and emphasis on grace.

If it were just me and my wife, I would probably attend this church because it is easy for me to filter out that which I don't agree. However, I have two young children (ages 6 and 5) and as they get older, I will be correcting the pastor's doctrine during our home Bible study time (this would probably happen with any church I attend).

Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might have....and sorry for the lack of brevity in this post.

[LaMontre]

I have been following the "Pauline Dispensationalism" thread for quite some time now, and instead of derailing that thread, I wanted to start a new one with a little bit of a different purpose than pure theological debate. I am especially interested in the comments of those who disagree with the extra division in scripture that Mid-Acts dispensationalists make.

My question is as follows: What are the practical implications of adhering to Mid-Acts dispensational theology for the believer? I am especially interested in negative implications (i.e. how would it hinder a believer's maturation process).

My motive behind this thread is as follows: My current understanding of the Bible is as an Acts 2 (sometimes called "traditional") dispensationalist. Unfortunately, I have not found any churches of this ilk in my town. However, we do have a Mid-Acts dispensational congregation....and I attended this church for eight months. As I came to learn more about this system of theology, I developed a couple of concerns that caused me to pull away from this congregation....at least for a time. These concerns are:

1. The pastor at this congregation seems to have an unhealthy obsession with water baptism....that is, he is totally against it. His obsession with water baptism seems to be equal to the obsession of the Campbellites (though in an opposite way).

2. The pastor does not believe that miracles are occurring today in any way. No healings.....nothing. They pray for God to give the sick person an extra measure of strength and grace to endure, but they don't pray for an actual healing.

3. The pastor seems to spend a bit too much time being concerned with the beliefs of other denominations.


On the other hand, there are many positive things about this congregation:

1. Lots of excellent Bible study...in fact, they go through the entire Bible every two years.

2. A very mature and loving body of believers. They support each other tremendously in time of need and have a real love of the Word.

3. I completely agree with their teachings on eschatology, salvation, and emphasis on grace.

If it were just me and my wife, I would probably attend this church because it is easy for me to filter out that which I don't agree. However, I have two young children (ages 6 and 5) and as they get older, I will be correcting the pastor's doctrine during our home Bible study time (this would probably happen with any church I attend).

Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might have....and sorry for the lack of brevity in this post.

Some of the "natural" conclusions of traditional dispensationalism actually are related to such extremes as the mid-acts nonsense. Such silliness as dividing Israel from the church to the point that Israelis who accept their Messiah lose their identity as Israelis. Something Paul is quick to lay to rest in Rom 11:1, and yet something that is still hotly defended. The "parenthetical" time period (called the church age) in which Israel is not being dealt with, and yet within that time, we have had 70 AD in fulfillment of Dan 9:26, A regathering of Israel into the land (most likely) in fulfillment of parts of Eze 37, and the new testament fulfillment of the prophecy of Moses in Deut 32:21 of Israel being provoked to jealousy. Paul believed his ministry worked in this regard. And yet, traditional dispensational teaching removes the reason for the jealousy, by causing Israel to have no part in the church for which they are supposed to be jealous.

Far more insidious (IMO) is the supposed "right division" of the new testament to the point where much of it is not written to the church except for very carefully selected portions that only the dispensationalist with the PHD can identify. It is truly a doctrine that has been allowed to run afowl of it's initial purposes.

[Big Daddy]

With all the "isms" that are put forth and proposed, people seem to want to take them to there respective extremes and there are hard lines drawn and division.

I sometimes feel that in the end when all will be revealed, we'll find that there is a pleasant middle that meanders through all these doctrines that man devises.

:)

[Sing4Him]

It would probably benefit all if you could post what mid-Acts believes! Thanks!

[BlessedinHim]

These concerns are:

1. The pastor at this congregation seems to have an unhealthy obsession with water baptism....that is, he is totally against it. His obsession with water baptism seems to be equal to the obsession of the Campbellites (though in an opposite way).

Paul did water baptize some.

Acts 16:28But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here.

29Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,

30And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

31And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

32And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.

33And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.

34And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

Acts 18
1After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;

2And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them.

3And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers.

4And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

5And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.

6And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

7And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.

8And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.

9Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace:

Here, Paul is retelling his story of conversion and he was also baptized

Acts 22
1Men, brethren, and fathers, hear ye my defence which I make now unto you.

2(And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,)

3I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.

4And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women.

5As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished.

6And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.

7And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

8And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.

9And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

10And I said, What shall I do, LORD? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.

11And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus.

12And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there,

13Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.

14And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.

15For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


1 Corinthians 1:11For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

14I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

15Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

16And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.

17For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.



As you can see, Paul was baptized by submersion and he also baptized others by submersion. So to say the Pauline gospel does not teach about or does not baptize is in error.



2. The pastor does not believe that miracles are occurring today in any way. No healings.....nothing. They pray for God to give the sick person an extra measure of strength and grace to endure, but they don't pray for an actual healing.

I dont know where it says that no miracles ever would ever happen again. But in my own experience, I believe in miracles. I believe in healing. There is probably more spiritual healing today than physical, but I know God heals in the physical, too. I believe God works in miraculous ways today. This isnt in the bible, but there is an old saying, an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure, something like that. I have seen God's providence in my life.

3. The pastor seems to spend a bit too much time being concerned with the beliefs of other denominations.

pointing fingers at others takes the heat off them for a little while I guess. I dont know of any denomination that has it 100% correct in the deep theolgy areas of the word. There is so much and God reveals what we can handle for the time.

We have to clean our own doorsteps before we can start pointing too many fingers at others. The bible says to pluck the beam out of your own eye then you can take the splinter out of your brothers eye.




Well, I just wanted to hit those concerns and say this, if this is the closest you can come to seeing the word preached, might be good for you to go there. Sounds like they are a nice bunch of people. It is God's church, not man's. Perhaps you are meant to be there to help them out a bit. There are a lot worse things he could be preaching.

May God guide you in this decision and where you should attend.

[LaMontre]

It would probably benefit all if you could post what mid-Acts believes! Thanks!

I don't know who this was addressed to, but I can answer....

There are several "groups" in the mid-acts camp, or at least there are them that give their particular "brand" a name, i.e. Bereans, Acts Dispensationalists, Pauline followers, Grace believers, and right dividers....and I think there are others.

I have noted on this site recently that they are KJVOnly believers, although I am not sure how that has relevence to the doctrine itself.

They believe that only the books written by the Apostle Paul were actually for the church. That is, they are the only ones to be used for Christian doctrine. Similarly, they think none of the other books of the bible teach salvation by grace through faith. The rest are for the Israeli's and Israeli believers. As if they are somehow different. Basically, they raise again the wall of partition that Jesus died to remove. And by this, (implicitly or not) they teach multiple gospels and methods of salvation.

The Lords Supper (communion) is not for the Church, but for Israel.

They believe the Church will not be on earth at all during the MK but will be in heaven, yet there is no scriptural support for this.

And of course, some will go so far as to exclude you from the church altogether if you disagree with their interpretations.

I think that covers most of it....I am sure there is more. Maybe someone else can post further information.

[Beth O]

I don't know who this was addressed to, but I can answer....

There are several "groups" in the mid-acts camp, or at least there are them that give their particular "brand" a name, i.e. Bereans, Acts Dispensationalists, Pauline followers, Grace believers, and right dividers....and I think there are others.

I have noted on this site recently that they are KJVOnly believers, although I am not sure how that has relevence to the doctrine itself.

:heythere I use KJV only and am not in the mid-acts, (Pauline disp) camp, so I didn't agree when you made that statement earlier. although I have enjoyed your posts on this topic and have learned a bunch from you. :nod Thanks!!

[kabozel]

The church that I spoke of in the opening post adheres to the following:

1. The "grace age" church began somewhere between Acts 9 - 13.

2. They do participate in the Lord's Supper.

3. They do not participate in water baptism.

4. They believe that Paul's writings are the only books written directly to the "grace age" church, but all of the Bible is "for" us.

5. This particular church is not KJV-only...the pastor uses the NIV.

I didn't really want this thread to become about the theology behind the mid-acts position....that is being discussed at great length in the "Pauline Dispensationalism" thread. I'm more interested in how this theology would negatively or positively impact the believer's walk.

[BlessedinHim]

As far as Israel goes, it is very important that we put them in their proper place in all this. Israel, to me, is very important. We are blessed and cursed according to how we deal with them.

[LaMontre]

I think that the believers walk can be dependent upon whether or not they are willing to apply certain teachings of Jesus to their doctrine.

I spoke to one a few years back, who I would consider very extreme. He held to Bullinger's views on this topic. And he believed that Mat 5 (the b-attitudes, as well as the rest of the gospels) weren't for the church, and should not be confused with Christian Doctrine.

He was also mid-acts...

Ya think that might effect a Christians walk? I dunnow, but I can tell you this, he was one of the most ugly debaters of the topic I have ever faced, and I have faced some real Lu-Lu's on this topic.