While I never pictured it like this, I held this view most of my life. I would tell you that before the flood only plants could be eaten, after the flood all animals, and so on... This implies that eating such animals move from a sin state to a not-a-sin state. You will notice there are no Bible verses here and this is to point out that there isn't Scripture that supports this view.

What hope do we have if our God changes what the definition of sin is depending on whatever "age" we are in? What hope do we have that He won't change more important matters, like who our Savior is?

These questions and more are a big reality to the view of Dispensationalism. God says in Amos 3:7 that He does nothing without revealing to His prophets first. There is nothing in the Prophets that talk about sin changing. In Malachi 3:6, God says He does not change. I've recently seen people write off someone who uses this verse to go against a change in the Law, but listen for a minute:

God cannot sin. I think we all agree on that. If we take Dispensationalism to its logical conclusion, that God cannot sin, and God can change the definition of sin, then the reason God cannot sin is because He can define what sin is based on His whims.

Is that Just? Is that Right? Or does that sound more like what a human would do, which God tells us he isn't: Numbers 23:19 - God is not a man that He should lie, nor a son of man that He should change his mind.

http://thestraightandnarrow.cfw.me/comics/430

#bible #biblestudy #torahobservant #hebrewroots #messianic #christian #comic #webcomic #wwjd