We're going to begin tonight, as Pastor said, a series, as he had requested, on the subject of dispensational truth. Very important to understand, and I trust that every one of you has received the notes. We have those notes there so that you can take them and fill in on anything that you missed, and so on. I wanted to say a few words about some of the books back there. I defined King James Bible. This is the box that it comes in. It is something that has recently been produced by our Bible for Today ministry. We have several back there and I want to just introduce you to them. The Defined St. James Bible is basically a very precious leather, full genuine leather, either black or burgundy. It's large print, it's 12 point large print so that you won't have to strain it for tired eyes, as we say. It's got three quarter inch margins on the side. But the distinctive feature is on the footnotes, the uncommon words of our St. James Bible are defined clearly. and accurately. People say, well I don't understand this word or that word. It's not used today. There's a definition. My son, D. A. Wade Jr. has been teaching in Christian schools since 1971 and he's an excellent man and he's got accurate definitions from the English language. Very good translation. And what you couldn't find in the English, he went to the Hebrew and the Greek. Other books are back there. I'm sure that you can look at them. The notes that we have on dispensational truth we want you to have Anybody that doesn't have them, why, please, you know, let us know. And I think he's already had them to raise their hands if they didn't have them. In the back of the paper, the notes, you'll see the chart, actually the chart that we're going to use starting tomorrow evening, God's dealings with man in this particular age and the plan of the ages. So that's the chart that's back there and we're going to begin this evening by just giving the importance, so I can reach all these things and still be alive, the importance of dispensationalism. First of all, the meaning of that word dispensation. It's important to know what it means. It's used four times in the New Testament, the word dispensation. It's used in 1 Corinthians 9.17, which is right here. For if I do this thing willingly I have a reward, but if against my will a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me. There's another verse, Ephesians 1.10, that in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in him. And then in Ephesians 3 verse 2, if you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given to me to you, and then Colossians 1.23, Where have I made a minister according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you to fulfill the word of God? So the other three places are listed there, but you notice on the next page of your notes the meaning of the Greek word translated dispensation. I think it's important for us to see that. It comes from the word oikumene. Okoumene, that's the Greek term, and that word is used seven times in the New Testament. Dispensation is translated four times, and stewardship three times. What it means comes from the word oikos, which is house, and nomos, which is a law, the law of the house, the rules of the household. And so dispensationalism is not only a time frame, but it's certain rules of the household, God's household, as to how he deals with men, women, boys and girls and children in a particular age in which we live. And so that's what that means. The management of a household or of household affairs, specifically the management or oversight, administration of others' property. It could refer to the office of a manager or overseer, stewardship, administration or dispensation. And so that's what the term means. The management of the house and the affairs of the house, the laws, the rules of the house. Every one of us has different rules in our houses. And this, of course, is what God has in his Bible in that regard. And then we're going to talk about the need for proper dispensationalism. The need. Now on the left, my left and your right, on the wall, you see this big chart that you have. From here you have the past, that's the alpha, the very beginning, there's no time there. And on the right hand side of the chart you have the omega, that's the word omega right there, that's the last word of the Greek alphabet, that's the end of time, that's eternity future, new heaven and new earth. So from eternity past to eternity future you have time, and God has dealt with man in time. And that's what we're talking about in these series of meetings, these five meetings tonight, Monday night, Tuesday night, Wednesday night, and Thursday night. The seven dispensations of innocence, of conscience, of human government, of promise, of law, of grace, and of the money of kingdom. Those are the seven dispensations of God's management upon earth. Now the need for proper dispensational truth, we took up Roman Catholicism for instance. The reason Roman Catholicism is flourishing is because they are misinterpreting the scriptures in the Bible. They don't have any dispensational truth in their whole category. And therefore, they have a priest dressed up with garments, like the Old Testament priesthood is dressed up in garments. They've got a whole priesthood just like the Old Testament. See, they don't know the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. There's no dispensational distinctions in the Roman Catholic system. Therefore, They're all wet as far as that's concerned. There's never anything in the New Testament of the Age of Grace that tells us we've got to have a priesthood, we have to have a Pope, we have to have all these things. They take it from the Old Testament. All their rituals, all their different things, even the offering that they have in the Mass. that they hold up the host, and this becomes the body and blood of Christ that he sacrificed on the altar. That's the sacrificial system of the Jews, the Old Testament Israel. And they don't have a working definition of what scripture is, so they're in confusion. And they're in error. And this is because they don't understand dispensational truth. And then the second thing, covenant theology. What is that? Well, those that believe in covenant theology, the Presbyterians, the Reformed people and so on, they believe instead of the dispensational truth, they teach that there are three covenants. Covenant of grace, covenant of works, covenant of redemption. And they have the Old Testament Jews as the church in the Old Testament. And they have everything all mixed up. They don't have the New Testament church as distinct from the Jews in Israel. In fact, that's the next thing right there in the point number three. Israel and the church is confused in covenant theology. The Old Testament promises to Israel are fulfilled, they say, in the church, the New Testament church. And that is absolutely wrong. There's not a single promise that God made to his earthly people Israel that will not be fulfilled literally in the Millennial Kingdom of our Savior. That's where it's going to happen. And this is a literal fulfillment. And you cannot take the promises to Israel, whether it's Abraham's seed, the stars of the heaven, or the sand of the seashore multiplied, or whatever the promise may be, it's going to be fulfilled. I don't know how these people get in. When we get into the Millennial Kingdom, the last dispensation, the last evening, Thursday evening, We will show some of the particular prophecies that God has given us in the Old Testament that have never been fulfilled. The desert blossoming as a rose, for example. That's going to be literally fulfilled. God's going to put fresh water to go from the city of Jerusalem, the temple itself, the new temple, the flow in the easterly direction all throughout that region of the desert, which is now desert, and the desert will blossom as a rose, literally. Well, how in the world can these covenant theologian people and these people who don't have a distinction between Israel and the truth, how do they interpret that? Like Mr. Camping, Family Radio. He's a man that believes a lot of things in the Bible, but he's all wet as far as dispensationalism. He says, oh, that just means that things are going to happen very nicely. No, my friend, the desert will blossom as a rose. Literally, God will have fresh water flow in there, and the desert that's to the east of Jerusalem will blossom. It'll be green, just like the greenery of Jordan and Jericho. Jericho is a wonderful green habitation. And so, these promises of Israel and the Church, you've got to have a distinction. And dispensational truth, as the Scriptures are interpreted properly, will give you that distinction. They say, well, we're Israel. We're the new Israel. No, we're not the new Israel. The Lord Jesus Christ, when he came to the world, when the fullness of time was come, Galatians 4, verse 4 says, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we, the church, might receive the adoption of sons. And because we're sons, he set the spirit of his Son into our hearts, whereby we might have a father. That's a new distinction. It says in the book of John, the law was given by Moses, But grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. There's a distinction between law and grace. Old Testament and New Testament. And we err in interpretation of our Bibles if we don't get that distinction. So, Israel and the church. And then proper Bible interpretation. That's essential. That's why we have this mix-up. In the early part of my Bible, in the fly leaf of this Bible, I have what we call the golden rule of Bible interpretation. We've liked it so much we put it in our defined King James Bible. That's also in there. The golden rule of Bible interpretation. I believe it's essential that we use that and we have it and we keep it before us. The Bible interpretation golden rule says this, when the plain sense of scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. That's clear. The plain sense, now there are figures of speech in the Bible. Let's not fool ourselves and say there are no figures of speech. There are. But when the plain sense of scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. Therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, unless the facts of the immediate context studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise. In other words, take it at its plain literal sense, unless there's figurative speech as we see from other references, God, in revealing his word, neither intends nor permits the reader to be confused. He wants his children to understand. And that's one of the key things when the plain sense of scripture makes common sense seek no other sense. And that's what they're doing. They're seeking other senses, these men that are not Bible interpreters of the dispensational truth. And then number five, the need for progressive dispensationalism. This progressive dispensationalism is being taught at Central Baptist Seminary. Even when your pastor Boris was there, they were teaching it. He went around and around, like you said, had some differences with his teacher, Professor Glennie, on this issue. He's one of the ones that's teaching it. We have people at Dallas Seminary. I'm a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, and they're teaching this so-called progressive dispensationalism. Two professors down there modified Dr. Schaefer's original dispensational truth. seminary, I wouldn't send anybody there now, it's a compromised box of I don't know what, but it was bad enough when I went there. It was not separatist, it was not Baptist, it was dispensational. The old Alice had some very good members of the faculty. Dr. Schaefer was one of my teachers. He taught our class from 1948 to 1952, four years. And he went home to be with the Lord that summer. But our four-year class had the whole four years with Dr. Schaefer as our teacher and others that are there. The New Dallas with Chuck, what's his last name? Swindoll as the president. Riding motorcycles and everything. He was asked this thing. It's a horrible, horrible seminary. Let me just be honest. That's why I can't back my seminary. I'm glad for the training I got. My Greek training, my Hebrew training, my Bible training, my exposure to church history, the old Dallas, I got some training that was worthwhile. But he was asked recently, Dr. Swindoll, is dispensationalism going to be the keynote of Dallas Theological Seminary in the future as it has been in the past? Words to that effect. He said, no, I'm not so sure. We're not so sure we're going to put dispensationalism at the very cornerstone of the seminary anymore. Now Dallas Seminary has made a shift when these two teachers Blaney and Blazing and Bach wrote a book on this progressive dispensationalism You'd think that Dr. John Wolvert, who used to be the president, now he's the, what do you call those people? The, well not emeritus, but also the chancellor, they got this name chancellor. Dr. Wolvert was one of my teachers and so on. You'd think he would protest this book. No, not at all. He merely simply said this, and I disagree 100% with it. He said, theology is changing. My friend, if it's biblical theology, it's not going to change. And if it changes, it's not biblical theology, as far as I'm concerned, see? And Dr. Schaeffer wrote an eight-volume systematic theology based upon the Word of God in the Bible. When we were in Dallas, we were taught, I think rightfully taught, as the old Schofield Reference Bible teaches, that the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5, 6, 7, those chapters in there, were a promise of the King when he would reign in the Millennial reign of Christ, and it would be fulfilled at that particular time. And that's what we were taught, that's what we believe, because some of those principles in the Sermon on the Mount are not applicable for today. If somebody steals a coat, give them the other coat. If somebody hits you on one side, give them the other, slap you on the other. When the Lord Jesus Christ reigns upon this earth, in the millennial reign of Christ, 1,000 years, literal reign of Christ, 1,000 years, He is going to reprimand everybody that gets out of line. And so you can turn the other cheek, and he's going to take a step in there, and justice will be ruled, and there's no problem. But until the king comes, the principles of his kingdom cannot be applied. But this progressive dispensationalism says, well, Matthew 5, 6, and 7, this Sermon on the Mount, that's applying to the church, and various things. And they also have another thing in that, and they say that the reign of Christ We think his future, and that's always what we've been taught, he's going to reign out of Jerusalem for 1,000 years. He says, well, he's reigning right now as well. They're confusing the reign of Christ. Well, he may have some sort of reign now, but I tell you, if he's reigning on this earth today, he's making a terrible, terrible tragedy of it. And I'm not trying to be blasphemous of our Savior. He's not reigning and ruling on this earth. Men are ruling their own selves and it's a mess. There's wars and rumors of wars and bombs and killings and so on and so forth all over the globe. But this progressive dispensationalism is a false view of the dispensational truth of the Bible. It's a mixture and it's a pollution. What it does, it goes back and reverts almost back to covenant theology. And I think Dallas Seminary and teaching that and having these professors teach it and having the stamp of approval by the Chancellor, Dr. John F. Walvoord upon it, I think that is encouraging people to come to the school and be taught and they're coming from all kinds of different religions and groups, the covenant theologians and whether they're dispensational or not and making them at home with Dallas Seminary in order to boost enrollment. We had a very small school when we were going there, 1948 to 1952, then I took the next year, 1953, for the Doctor of Theology. In fact, the matter is, they don't even have a Doctor of Theology at Dallas-Seminary anymore. Just wiped it right out. The Doctor of Theology is no good anymore. They've got their Doctor of Philosophies, they've got all their other Doctor's Degrees and so on, but they just have changed, and so Progressive Dispensationalism is different. There's another one that's in aberrant form, and that is Hyper-Dispensationalism. That's another extreme form of dispensationalism. It's taught by E.W. Bullinger, for example, in the Bible he put out. He's got a lot of information in that Bible. But J.C. O'Hare in the Chicago area has been teaching that. Hyperdispensationalism puts a separate dispensation in the book of Acts. Now that's the difference between the properties of satanism and here's. In other words, you have the age of grace, which is right here, right over there. There's the age of grace. You have the tribulation period right here, which is separate. But you see the book of Acts between Calvary, the cross, and the advent of the Holy Spirit of God, there's the book of Acts, a transitional period of time. And rather than to say that's transitional, It's part of law, part of grace. They say there's an entire different dispensation at that particular time in the book of Acts. That's hyper-dispensationalism. And wherever they put the start of that dispensation determines how many ordinances you have in the local church. If you put it at a certain place in the book of Acts, you have one ordinance. Either baptism or the Lord's Supper. Not both. If you put it at another place, you have no ordinances. Absolutely no ordinances at all. Now the reasons they put that in there, they say only the time when Paul's epistles started to be written was the time when the church really is for the church and the rest of the time during the book of Acts before Paul wrote the letters. They're not proper, they're part of the Old Testament and so we don't have certain ordinances like war, supper and baptism, water baptism. So this is hyper-dispensationalism, which is wrong and which is false. I think that we have to have our heads on properly. Now, as to the seven dispensations, innocence, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace, and kingdom, there are some that don't like these first. Innocence, conscience, promise, or human government, and promise. They say, well, that's not a dispensation. But they do understand there's a difference between law and grace. Israel and the church. They realize there's a difference in the Millennial Kingdom of Christ. And so, many people, they're not complete dispensationists, but at least they have these three law of creation kingdoms, and they realize that there's a difference of distinction in at least three. And we're going to see, I believe very clearly, starting tomorrow evening, that there are distinctions in all of these. And we have to be seven, all together seven. We can't go four, five, or six. But there are seven different ways that God has been dealing with men. For instance, now there are some other things. In addition to hyperdispensation, I just added a few other things here. I didn't list them down, but water baptism is one of them. Water baptism. What are the subjects of it? What is the method of it? What's the motive? The false dispensation, those that don't believe dispensation, the covenant theologians, The ones that make no distinction between Israel and the church say that the baptism is like the covenant of circumcision of the Jews. And so when he's eight days old, the boy is circumcised. I don't know what they're going to do with the girls. I guess they don't maybe sprinkle the girls in their testament because they didn't have the right of circumcision. But that's what they say. That baptism, infant baptism, is the same as the covenant of circumcision. Eight days, so they sprinkle babies. Now that's because it's a failure on the part of not being dispensational. Now that's partly the truth for the case. Not always, but partly the case. Because there are some Presbyterian dispensationalists that sprinkle babies. So I'm not saying that's always the case, but that's a part of the case. Those that go back and to use the covenant of circumcision to mix up water baptism. So this is the need for dispensational truth. Well, let's take a look at that next topic, the next page. Some of the proofs. Some of the proofs for proper dispensationalism. For instance, we have no Garden of Eden. Do we? Now, if you don't understand the scriptures properly, there's no garden. The second thing, we're not innocent. We have sinned because Adam and Eve have sinned. No garden of Eden. These are some of the things, we don't have a paradise in this. So when you read the Old Testament scripture, read the book of Genesis, this is for us, for our benefit, but it's not to us. It's for us, but not to us. There's a complete different economy, oikonomia, a law of the household, a completely different dispensation for the one in the Garden of Eden than for us. Nothing to do with it. We are not innocent. Innocency means you haven't yet sinned. Well, now that Adam and Eve said, why, the babies that come into our life, they're sinners from the birth. You and I were sinners when we were born. And we go astray from the womb. There's not any innocency in us. And then the third thing. We're not herbivorous. That is eating only herbs or meat eaters. The animals are not herbivorous. Some are. The cows eat herbs and grass. I'm glad they're not eating people or eating things, not animals. But the dogs, the pastor, we were talking at lunch, I guess, was it lunch? Thank you for the beer, they had us over there for lunch. Talking about the dogs eating the deer, chasing after the deer. They've got to keep their three dogs in. They used to have five, now they've got three. Two of them died. One would be enough for some of us, but they've got plenty of room to roam. In fact, in the city, it's hard to even have any once. But he said, if you let those dogs loose, they'll chase the deer down and eat them alive. Well, I'd die after, I'd kill him, but I mean, I'd drag the bones right back into the yard. But you have the picture in Genesis 3.18, and God says you eat of the herb of the field. Man eats of the herb of the field, vegetables. The beast, the animals, eat of the herb of the field. Now, we're not under that disposition, we're under a completely different law of the household. Anybody can see this clear. To interpret the Bible, you've got to have a certain aspect of it. God deals with men at different times, different ways, different circumstances. But in Genesis 9, verse 3, not only the herb of the field, but all the flesh shall be meat for you. Now you're going to eat meat after the flood. So you see, that's the distinction. In the book of Genesis, in the time of innocence, just herbs. In the time of conscience, just herbs. But then the flood. came and now you're all of a sudden eating meat. There's different distinctions. You've got to be a dispensationalist to properly understand the Bible. Otherwise, you can't understand. And then, we're not naked in public. At least most of those, I would hope. Some of these people bathe on beaches and so on. But in Genesis 2.25 it says Adam and Eve were naked. and they put coats of skin after they sinned they put fig leaves to clothe them and God clothed them with coats of skins the shedding of blood again is a picture of redemption but all these things have got to be understood because we read the Bible as dispensational believers and they're all things are not the same they're different and then we're not promised children as the sand of the sea Abraham was He hasn't said to the pastor, now he's working on it, but he doesn't say to any of us. Our children will be as the stars of heaven. This has got to be understood dispensationally, separate and distinct. And then let's go over here to the next one here. Proofs of proper dispensation are needed. We're not told to build an ark. But Noah was, Genesis 6.14, he says, Noah, build an ark because it's going to rain. And he was probably 120 years building that ark, and scoffed at it and so on and so forth. But we're not told to build that ark, there's no rain. So this is another need. We're not told to take pairs of animals, in order after the flood was finished, that he would be able to sacrifice the clean beasts, two of each kind, and the clean beast, seven pairs of those. We're not told that, but I know I was. We're not told to sacrifice animals as offerings, and that's the whole Old Testament. You bring a sacrifice. If you would add up all the sacrifices that come to about 1,256 or so, every single year, 1,256 or more every year. How do I get that? You just go to Leviticus 23 and Numbers 28, and you add up all the things they had to bring. There's a daily sacrifice, morning and evening. There's a weekly sacrifice. There's a monthly sacrifice. And then the feasts of Israel, seven feasts of Israel. You've got a sacrifice for Passover, a certain sacrifice for unleavened bread, and for firstfruits, and Pentecost, and trumpets, and atonement, and tabernacles, all these, and you add them all up. Now these are just plain, that's not even counting the individual sacrifice and offerings for the five chapters of Leviticus. The burnt offerings, and the meal offerings, and the sin offerings, and the trespass offerings. These are just obligatory offerings that had to be made every year. I'm glad the Lord Jesus came once to die, no more sacrifice for sin. We're not told to do that, and if you don't understand dispensational truth, you're in the law right here, and you're going to be sacrificing saints, and we're not told of that in the New Testament. It's a different thing, a different situation, a different setup. And then, we're not told to go to Jerusalem three times a year. That's again, that's law. Exodus 34, 23. Israelites were told to go to Jerusalem. I've been there once. My mom sent the two of us there in 1983, 84. Wouldn't have gone if she hadn't sent us, but she said, let's go. So, praise the Lord, we went. We're not told to go there three times a year. Can you imagine the cost that would be for every citizen in the world to go to Jerusalem three times a year? The Israelites had to do it, as they dwell in that land. The first month they had to go because there were three feasts. Sacrifice of Passover, of first fruits, and the day of atonement. Those three. And then they had to go in the third month, because that was Pentecost. Then three feasts in the seventh month. So the first month, third month, and seventh month they had to go every year right to Jerusalem. We don't have to do that. That's not the case. Discretionary we don't have. We're not permitted to take many wives. Now people are taking many wives, I'm sorry to say, but listen. Not that God honored it and commanded it, but He permitted it for many wives. I'm sure he didn't go along with a thousand and one like Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines plus the queen of Pharaoh's daughter but he permitted it polygamy and polygyny many wives now the wives didn't have many husbands but he permitted that Abraham had many wives but that's not the case here In this New Testament time, the Lord Jesus clearly said, for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave with his wife, they shall be one flesh. And what God has joined together, let not man put asunder. And men have been putting asunder marriages right and left, right down the line. It's a sad thing indeed. But that's not the dispensation we're living in. People say, well, didn't David have extra wives, different ones? Yes, he did. But God permitted it. That's Old Testament law. But under grace, we're not supposed to do it. I don't know how many families here have been broken up by divorce and remarried, I don't know. But all I know is, one at a time till death parts us. That's a preposterous word. Those are the preposterous words that seem preposterous as you say them, that preachers preach, that preachers say at weddings. Do you honor your husband and wife and will you live with them under God's holy law? And so on and so forth, as long as the two shall live? They say, I do, and they lie through their teeth. And they break that covenant of marriage, right and left. And I don't know, it's a sad thing. It's hard to keep together, but we don't have many wives today. God's permitted them in the Old Testament, but not now. And then other things, I'll just add a few more. We're not told to build a tabernacle. Moses was. The Old Testament had to build a tabernacle to worship the Lord. We're not told to build a temple. Solomon built his temple. David prepared for it. See, these are distinctions that we have to understand. If we're reading our Bibles, Genesis to Revelation, as I hope we are, and I hope you read it 85 verses per day, that gets you through in a year. That's one of the features of our Defined King James Bible. They have a Bible reading schedule in the front, and every 85 verse section is marked with a diamond. And that will take you through your Bible in one year, 85 verses per day. And we encourage that to read the scriptures. Then, moving on to another thing. Some things are trans-dispensational. What do I mean by that? Well, they go across the different dispensations. Certainly, capital punishment is one. for first-degree murder. That's trans-dispensational. They go across. That was the case. Now God did pardon in the day of, in the conscience, when Cain slew Abel. He pardoned him, put a mark on Cain, threw him out of the garden, didn't kill him. And so I realize that. But starting with human government, in Genesis chapter 9, after the flood, God said, Whoso sheddeth man's blood by man, that is governmental authority, shall his blood be shed. Capital punishment for first degree murder. Genesis chapter 9. And it's in the book of Old Testament Law, Numbers 35. There's a number of details as far as capital punishment for murder. Murderer shall be put to death. Acts 25.11 in the case of Paul. Paul says, now if I have done anything worthy of death, I refuse not to die. Paul believed in capital punishment for murder or causing of death. The Lord Jesus Christ believed in capital punishment. He gave himself up in a Roman sentence even though he was innocent. He was not worthy to die except for the sins of the world in the Lord's hands in the governmental rule of God, but he was not worthy to die as far as man's laws. There were trumped up charges against him, but he refused not to die. He submitted to capital punishment. Death. The death penalty. And then Romans chapter 13 and verse 4. In the New Testament, God says very clearly, He gives a definition of what scriptural government is. A scriptural government is a type of government that will approve of the good and just go after the evil. And communism is not a scriptural form of government. and other forms of government, socialism and Nazism and so on. These are not scriptural forms, biblical government. And it says, what you do that which is good, you'll have the praise of your government. But if you do evil, beware, Romans 13, verse 4, he beareth not the sword in vain. The sword is the machaira, the short 18-inch sword of capital punishment. The Roman sword. It's in the New Testament, it's in the Old Testament. It's a trans-dispensational thing. Capital punishment for first-degree murder. And then, abstaining from eating of blood. That's Old Testament, but it's also New Testament. As well as abstaining from fornication, adultery, other immorality. But abstaining from blood was in the Book of Acts, chapter 15, verse 20. when they decided what they should do as far as Christians coming to Christ that were Gentiles. Should we put them under the law? And the decision was no, they're not going to go under the law except four things. Abstain from fornication, from eating of blood, things offered to idols, and one other thing, they were to abstain from it. So this is trans-dispensational. Old Testament, we're not to eat the blood. And in the New Testament not to eat the blood. The life of the flesh is in the blood thereof. Leviticus is very clear on that. And still in the New Testament, now there are some people that eat blood. Let me just tell you, when you have a steak that is rare, you're eating blood. When you're eating any meat, this red meat, blood meat, It's not kosher, drained of the blood before it's cooked and before it's sold. You're eating, you've got to be careful, you're eating blood. But you're eating much more blood if it's rare, see. Since I had cancer of the lymph glands, Hodgkin's disease 1985, one of the things I've sort of gone easier on is eating red meat, chicken and fish, things like that, and vegetables. But anyway, God says don't eat the blood. Now that's one of the things he corrected Saul. When he didn't kill all the Amalekites in chapter 15 of 1 Samuel, they took the spoil and began eating blood. God says, no, see, the life of the flesh is in the blood. And it's a transdispensation, even in the New Testament, abstained from these things. And then 9 of the 10 commandments are repeated in the New Testament. That's transdispensation. We were never told to honor the Sabbath day to keep it holy. We don't worship on the seventh day, which is Saturday. We worship the Lord on the first day of the week, which is the Lord's Day. But all the other nine commandments are repeated somewhere in the New Testament. These are transdispensations, go across the dispensations. So these are some of the things I wanted to bring up tonight. Now, the next four nights, we're going to continue moving along in some detail. We're going to try to take 3 in 1 that first night, which is tomorrow night, dispensation of innocence, conscience, and human government. That's going to be Monday evening. Tuesday, dispensation of promise and law. And then on Wednesday, dispensation of grace. And the Thursday evening, dispensation of the kingdom. So these are the things that we're going to be doing as we go along. So we're going to take those in more detail as things move on.