KJV BIBLE SCOPE

2 days ago | [YT] | 23

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 14 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 14

## PROPER DISPENSATIONALISM VERSUS HYPERDISPENSATIONALISM

The issue in Luke 10 is not whether the Bible should be rightly divided. Second Timothy 2:15 commands it. The issue is **where Scripture itself makes the divisions**. Proper dispensationalism distinguishes Israel from the Church, law from grace, the earthly kingdom from the Body of Christ, the Rapture from the Second Advent, and temporary apostolic signs from ordinary Christian ministry. Hyperdispensationalism goes farther and creates divisions Scripture never explicitly establishes.

Luke 10 contains a genuine kingdom commission. The seventy preached, “The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you” (Luke 10:9). They healed the sick, exercised supernatural authority, and received temporary instructions concerning purse, scrip, and shoes. Christians today are not under that commission.

But this does not prove that Christ’s teaching is generally outside Church doctrine, that the Body began with Paul, or that Peter and Paul preached contradictory ways of eternal salvation.

Paul himself prevents those conclusions. He says, “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1). He requires consent “to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Timothy 6:3). He also applies Christ’s teaching to the Church (1 Corinthians 7:10; 9:14; 1 Timothy 5:18).

Neither did the Church begin with Paul. Before Saul’s conversion, Acts 8:3 says he “made havock of the church.” Paul later admits, “I persecuted the church of God” (1 Corinthians 15:9). Christ even told Saul, “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest” (Acts 9:5). Paul cannot be the first member of something he was already persecuting.

Nor did Paul introduce a different crucified-and-risen Christ. After describing Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection, Paul says concerning himself and the earlier apostles, “whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed” (1 Corinthians 15:11).

The correct conclusion is therefore balanced. **Do not steal Israel’s promises, but do not discard Christ’s words. Do not put the Church under the law, but do not remove Christian obedience under grace. Do not claim the seventy’s miraculous commission, but do not use their signs to manufacture another Church. Do not minimize Paul’s special revelation, but do not make Paul the beginning of something Scripture says existed before his conversion.**

Romans 11:1 says God has not cast away Israel. Ephesians 3:3-6 establishes Paul’s special revelation concerning the mystery. Both truths stand. Neither requires hyperdispensationalism.

The controlling rule is simple: **divide where Scripture divides and stop where Scripture stops.**

Luke 10 belongs historically to Christ’s earthly ministry. Its kingdom commission must remain in that setting. Yet its teachings concerning mercy, hearing God’s word, faithful labour, prayer, and spiritual priorities harmonize with later Church doctrine.

Right division preserves distinctions without creating contradictions. It allows all Scripture to speak according to its proper audience and purpose.

The final problem with Mid-Acts hyperdispensationalism is therefore **over-division**. It begins with necessary distinctions but carries them beyond explicit Scripture.

Paul never taught Christians to choose between himself and Jesus Christ. Paul pointed Christians continually to Christ.

“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 3:11).

Therefore the final rule for Luke 10—and for dispensational Bible study as a whole—is:

**DISTINGUISH WHAT GOD DISTINGUISHES. NEVER CONFUSE ISRAEL AND THE CHURCH. NEVER CONFUSE LAW AND GRACE. NEVER CONFUSE JUSTIFICATION AND SANCTIFICATION. BUT NEVER DIVIDE WHAT GOD HAS JOINED TOGETHER.**

That is biblical right division.

2 days ago | [YT] | 12

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 13 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 13

## PETER, PAUL, ACTS 15, AND THE CLAIM OF TWO SAVING GOSPELS

A major Mid-Acts claim is that Peter and Paul preached two different saving gospels—one supposedly for Israel and another revealed to Paul for the Body of Christ. Scripture recognizes differences in their apostleships and fields of ministry, but it does not teach two contradictory ways of receiving eternal salvation.

Acts 15 is decisive. The controversy concerned men teaching, “Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1). Peter answers by referring to Gentiles who had believed. He says God “put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith” (Acts 15:9).

Then Peter declares:

> “But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (Acts 15:11).

Notice carefully: Peter does not say, “Israel is saved through one gospel while Gentiles are saved through Paul’s gospel.” He says God “put no difference between us and them” and that “we shall be saved, even as they.”

Galatians 2 likewise distinguishes apostolic ministries without establishing two methods of justification. Paul says “the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter” (Galatians 2:7). The next verse explains the distinction: Peter had “the apostleship of the circumcision,” while Paul ministered “toward the Gentiles” (Galatians 2:8).

The emphasis is their principal fields of apostleship.

Most importantly, Galatians 2:9 says James, Cephas, and John gave Paul and Barnabas “the right hands of fellowship.” They were not preaching contradictory ways of eternal salvation.

Paul also rejects multiple saving gospels in Galatians 1:8-9: “if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”

First Corinthians 15 makes the unity even clearer. After declaring Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection, Paul mentions Cephas, the twelve, James, the apostles, and himself. He then concludes:

> “Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed” (1 Corinthians 15:11).

That statement is extremely difficult to reconcile with two contradictory saving gospels.

Paul certainly possessed a distinct apostleship and received special revelation concerning the Body of Christ. Those distinctions must be maintained. But different apostles, different audiences, and different ministry emphasis do not automatically equal different ways of eternal salvation.

Romans 3:29-30 asks, “Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.” God justifies “the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.”

Therefore Peter and Paul must be distinguished without being divided beyond Scripture. **Their apostleships differed, but salvation rests upon the same Lord Jesus Christ and His finished work.**

**Part 14: Proper Dispensationalism Versus Hyperdispensationalism — The Final Biblical Conclusion on Luke 10.**

2 days ago | [YT] | 9

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 12 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 12

## MARTHA, MARY, AND THE WORDS OF CHRIST

Luke 10 closes with Martha and Mary. Martha was “cumbered about much serving,” while Mary “sat at Jesus’ feet, and heard his word” (Luke 10:39-40). Christ told Martha, “thou art careful and troubled about many things,” but concerning Mary He said, “one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part” (Luke 10:41-42).

This creates a serious inconsistency for an extreme Mid-Acts approach. If Christ’s pre-cross teaching must be separated doctrinally from the Church because Paul had not yet been saved, why should Christians apply Christ’s instruction concerning Mary?

Paul answers the question by pointing Christians directly to Christ’s words. Colossians 3:16 says, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom.” First Timothy 6:3 warns against anyone who does not “consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Paul therefore does not teach Christians to distance themselves from Christ’s words. He tells them to receive them properly.

The same principle appears in Christian conduct. First Corinthians 11:1 says, “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.” Philippians 2:5 says, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.” Ephesians 5:2 commands believers to “walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us.”

Mary therefore illustrates an enduring spiritual principle: **service must never replace attention to God’s word.**

Martha’s serving was not itself evil. The problem was that she became “careful and troubled about many things” while Mary gave priority to hearing Christ.

The same danger exists in a local church today. A church can become occupied with activities, schedules, programs, administration, and outward service while neglecting Scripture. Yet Paul commands Timothy, “Preach the word” (2 Timothy 4:2).

Luke 10 therefore demonstrates why interpretation and application must be distinguished without being separated. Historically, Christ was speaking to Martha and Mary before Paul’s conversion. Yet the principle harmonizes perfectly with Church doctrine.

The lesson is not that everything spoken before Paul applies directly to Christians. Neither is it that nothing applies unless Paul repeats it word for word. **Each passage must be classified according to its context and compared with the rest of Scripture.**

Right division does not remove the Christian from the feet of Jesus Christ. Paul himself tells us: **“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly.”**

**Part 13: Peter, Paul, Acts 15, Galatians, and the Claim of Two Saving Gospels.**

2 days ago | [YT] | 10

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 11 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 11

## THE GOOD SAMARITAN — JUSTIFICATION OR SANCTIFICATION?

The Good Samaritan in Luke 10:30-37 does **not** teach salvation by good works. But neither should “Go, and do thou likewise” be dismissed as instruction belonging only to another dispensational program.

The context begins with the lawyer “willing to justify himself” (Luke 10:29). Christ exposes his self-righteousness by showing what loving one’s neighbour actually requires. The priest and Levite passed by the wounded man, but the Samaritan “had compassion on him” (Luke 10:33), bound his wounds, cared for him, and paid his expenses. Christ then asks, “Which now of these three... was neighbour unto him?” The lawyer answers, “He that shewed mercy on him.” Christ replies, “Go, and do thou likewise” (Luke 10:36-37).

This cannot mean, “Do these works and thereby justify yourself before God.” Romans 3:28 says, “a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Ephesians 2:8-9 says salvation is “through faith... Not of works.”

But after salvation, good works belong to **sanctification and Christian service**. Ephesians 2:10 immediately says believers are “created in Christ Jesus unto good works.” Titus 3:8 tells those “which have believed in God” to “be careful to maintain good works.”

Paul even repeats the command underlying the Good Samaritan. Galatians 5:14 says, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” Romans 12:20 says, “if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink.” Galatians 6:10 says, “let us do good unto all men.”

Therefore Paul does not contradict Christ’s command to show mercy; he confirms its proper Christian application.

The distinction is simple: **showing mercy cannot justify a sinner, but a justified believer should show mercy.**

Good works are not the **root** of eternal salvation; they belong to the believer’s **walk after salvation**. Confusing those categories produces works salvation. But dispensationally removing mercy from Christian responsibility creates the opposite error.

The Good Samaritan therefore illustrates conduct entirely consistent with Christian sanctification: compassion, sacrifice, kindness, and doing good to another without seeking personal advantage.

We are saved through faith in Christ’s finished work, not by becoming Good Samaritans. But once saved, we should certainly “do good unto all men” (Galatians 6:10).

**Part 12: Martha and Mary — If Christ’s Words Were Only for Israel, Why Does Paul Tell Christians to Let “the Word of Christ” Dwell in Them Richly?**

2 days ago | [YT] | 9

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 10 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 10

## THE LAWYER, THE LAW, AND ETERNAL LIFE

Luke 10:25 records a lawyer asking Christ, “Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” Christ answers, “What is written in the law? how readest thou?” After the lawyer quotes the commandments to love God and his neighbour, Christ says, “Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live” (Luke 10:26-28). Mid-Acts teaching can interpret this as though Christ were giving Israel a works-based method of obtaining eternal life. But that cannot be correct because Scripture plainly says the law could never justify a sinner.

Galatians 3:21 settles the issue: “for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.” Romans 3:20 likewise says, “by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight.” Therefore Christ was not teaching that an Israelite could earn eternal life through successful law-keeping.

The key is Luke 10:29: “But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?” The lawyer’s problem was **self-righteousness**. He thought he could justify himself.

Christ therefore allows the law to expose him. The requirement was not partial obedience. He must love God “with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind” and his neighbour as himself (Luke 10:27).

Could he honestly claim perfect obedience to that standard? No.

James 2:10 states the principle: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” Romans 3:19 explains the law’s effect: “that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.”

The lawyer’s mouth should have been stopped. Instead, he attempted to justify himself.

That leads directly into the Good Samaritan.

Christ was exposing how far short this man fell of the very commandment he claimed to understand. The passage therefore does not establish a former works-gospel whereby Israelites earned eternal life through keeping the Mosaic law.

Paul says in Acts 13:39, “by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.”

The law could expose sin. It could condemn the guilty. But it could not give eternal life to a sinner through his own righteousness.

Therefore Luke 10 must not be used to manufacture a works-based salvation program before Paul.

**The lawyer wanted to justify himself; Christ used the law to expose the impossibility of self-justification.**

**Part 11: The Good Samaritan — Does “Go, and Do Thou Likewise” Teach Salvation by Works, or Christian Sanctification?**

2 days ago (edited) | [YT] | 9

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 9 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH
# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 9

## SAUL PERSECUTED THE CHURCH BEFORE HE WAS SAVED

One of the clearest problems for the claim that the Body of Christ began with Paul is Paul’s own testimony. Before Saul was saved in Acts 9, Scripture repeatedly says he was already persecuting **“the church.”**

Acts 8:3 says, “As for Saul, he made havock of the church.” Galatians 1:13 says, “I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it.” First Corinthians 15:9 says, “I am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.”

Notice Paul’s inspired terminology. He does not say, “I persecuted Israel’s kingdom assembly which was later replaced by the Body of Christ.” He calls the people he persecuted **“the church of God.”**

Acts 9 makes the argument even stronger. Christ confronted Saul saying, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” Saul answered, “Who art thou, Lord?” Christ replied, “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest” (Acts 9:4-5).

Saul was persecuting believers, yet Jesus said Saul was persecuting **Him**. Why? Because Christ identifies Himself with His people.

Paul later explains this truth in 1 Corinthians 12:12: “For as the body is one, and hath many members... so also is Christ.” Verse 27 says, “Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”

Therefore the basic reasoning is unavoidable: **Saul persecuted Christ’s church before Saul belonged to it. A man cannot be the first member of something that he was already persecuting before he became a member.**

Paul certainly received special revelation concerning the Body of Christ (Ephesians 3:3-6), but revelation about the Church is not the same thing as the historical beginning of the Church.

The Mid-Acts position therefore requires a distinction Scripture never states: that the “church of God” Saul persecuted was fundamentally different from the Church Paul later describes.

But where does the King James Bible say that?

It does not.

Instead, Scripture deliberately preserves Paul’s own confession: **“I persecuted the church of God.”**

Right division must accept that plain statement rather than redefine “church of God” to protect a system.

**Part 10: The Lawyer, the Law, and “What Shall I Do to Inherit Eternal Life?” — Was Jesus Teaching Salvation by Law-Keeping?**

2 days ago | [YT] | 9

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 8 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 8

## DID THE BODY OF CHRIST BEGIN WITH PAUL IN ACTS 9?

The Mid-Acts position commonly teaches that the Body of Christ began with Paul at his conversion in Acts 9. The problem is simple: **no verse says this.** Scripture instead shows a church already existing before Paul was saved.

Acts 8:1 speaks of “the church which was at Jerusalem.” Acts 8:3 then says, “As for Saul, he made havock of the church.” Paul later confirms this in Galatians 1:13: “I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it.” First Corinthians 15:9 likewise says, “I persecuted the church of God.”

Therefore Paul did not begin the church he had already been persecuting.

Acts 9 makes the identification even stronger. When Christ confronted Saul, He said, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” Saul asked, “Who art thou, Lord?” Christ answered, “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest” (Acts 9:4-5).

Saul was physically persecuting Christ’s disciples, yet Christ said Saul was persecuting **Him**. That perfectly agrees with Paul’s later doctrine concerning the Body. First Corinthians 12:12 says, “For as the body is one, and hath many members... so also is Christ.” Verse 27 says, “Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”

The identification existed before Saul’s conversion.

Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 12:13 says, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body.” Before Pentecost Christ promised in Acts 1:5, “ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” Acts 2 records the coming of the Holy Ghost, long before Acts 9.

Paul certainly received fuller revelation concerning the nature, calling, position, and unity of the Body (Ephesians 2:14-16; 3:3-6). But **receiving the revelation of something does not prove that the thing began when it was revealed to Paul.**

The decisive question remains: Where does Scripture say, “The Body of Christ began with Paul”?

It does not.

Instead, Paul repeatedly says he persecuted **“the church of God”** before he was saved.

Therefore Acts 9 records Paul entering and becoming Christ’s apostle—not Paul becoming the first member of a Church that did not previously exist.

**Part 9: Saul Persecuted the Church Before He Was Saved — Why This Creates a Major Problem for Mid-Acts.**

2 days ago | [YT] | 10

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 7 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 7

## WAS CHRIST’S DEATH AND RESURRECTION FIRST REVEALED AS THE SAVING GOSPEL TO PAUL?

A major Mid-Acts claim is that the gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection was first revealed to Paul as a completely new saving message. Paul certainly received revelation from Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:11-12), but Scripture does not say that Christ’s death and resurrection were first preached by Paul.

Before Paul was saved, Peter preached, “Him... ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: Whom God hath raised up” (Acts 2:23-24). Acts 2:32 says, “This Jesus hath God raised up.” Acts 3:15 says Israel “killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead.” Acts 4:33 says, “with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.”

Most decisively, Paul himself joins his preaching with theirs in 1 Corinthians 15. After declaring Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection in verses 3-4, Paul names Cephas, the twelve, James, the apostles, and finally himself. Then verse 11 says:

> “Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.”

Paul does not say, “They preached one saving message and I preached another.” He says, **“whether it were I or they, so we preach.”**

Nor was Christ’s death and resurrection an unrevealed mystery. Paul twice says they occurred “according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Christ Himself foretold that He would “be killed, and be raised again the third day” (Matthew 16:21).

Paul received tremendous additional revelation concerning the Body of Christ, but additional revelation does not mean a different Saviour or contradictory gospel.

The saving message centers upon the same crucified and risen Lord Jesus Christ.

**Part 8: Did the Body of Christ Begin With Paul in Acts 9?**

2 days ago | [YT] | 11

KJV BIBLE SCOPE

PART 6 - REFUTING HYPER-DISPENSATION - BROTHER ED WIRTH

# LUKE 10 MID-ACTS REFUTATION — PART 6

## PROPHECY VERSUS MYSTERY — WHAT WAS ACTUALLY KEPT SECRET?

The Mid-Acts argument correctly recognizes a distinction between prophecy and mystery, but then often makes the mystery include things Scripture says were already revealed. Romans 16:25 calls it “the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began.” The question is: **What exactly was secret?**

It cannot simply be Christ’s death and resurrection. Paul says Christ died for our sins and rose again “according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Christ Himself foretold His death and resurrection in Matthew 16:21, and after rising He said, “Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day” (Luke 24:46).

Neither was Gentile blessing itself the mystery. God told Abraham, “in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” (Genesis 12:3). Isaiah 49:6 foretold salvation reaching “unto the end of the earth.”

Ephesians 3:3-6 identifies the mystery more precisely: the Gentiles would be “fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.” Ephesians 2:15-16 describes Jew and Gentile being made “one new man” and reconciled “unto God in one body by the cross.”

Therefore we must distinguish **the gospel from the mystery concerning the Body**. Paul’s gospel contained previously revealed truth concerning Christ while Paul also received previously hidden revelation concerning the Church.

Romans 1:2 even says the gospel of God “he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures.”

Thus prophecy and mystery are real distinctions, but they cannot be turned into “everything before Paul versus everything revealed through Paul.” Paul himself combines previously revealed Scripture with newly revealed truth.

**Right division asks what was actually kept secret instead of declaring everything connected with Paul a secret.**

**Part 7: Was Christ’s Death and Resurrection First Revealed as the Saving Gospel to Paul?**

2 days ago | [YT] | 10