re old vs new testament rexlex fnal fnal gov writes we can jillustrate this by pointing to the way god administers his judgment in the ot sins were not forgiven but rather covered up in the age of the church not only are sins forgiven taken away but the power of sin is put to death my this distinction seems quite arbitrary blessed is the man whose iniquities are forgiven whose sin is covered ps and quoted by the apostle paul even as david also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom god imputeth righteousness without works saying blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered blessed is the man to whom the lord will not impute sin rom the biblical perspective seems to be that foregiveness and covering are parallel equivalent concepts in both testaments the dispensational distinction is unwarranted during the millenium we read that sins are dealt with immediately under the present ie that christ is present on earth rulership of christ i m sure rex has scripture to back this up you re suggesting jesus is going to travel around dealing with individual violations of his law for millions perhaps billions of people such activity for moses the lawgiver was considered unwise cf ex ff it makes for interesting speculation though i ll leave comments on the so called bema seat vs throne judgments to someone else this also seems like more unnecessary divisions ala dispensationalism tom albrecht
