In reply to:
[color:"blue"]A dispensation is a moral period in the world's history which ends in a special judgement. In each of the seven dispensations, God revealed Himself to His people, or to the world, always in a somewhat different pattern. God's plan of salvation is the same in each dispensation, yet He may deal differently with man in each of these periods of history.

I'm actually glad, in one aspect, that you quoted this in your reply. For, it will serve to show why Dispensationalism, at least the form that you apparently hold to, is totally incompatible with Calvinism and Reformed theology. The Decalogue (10 Commandments) are not and never were "Mosaic". Nor were they restricted to the nation of Israel. These moral laws were from creation itself and all men were punished for breaking them. Do you remember Cain? He broke the Sixth Commandment thousands of years before Moses stood upon Mt. Sinai. I could easily give you biblical examples where God's wrath fell upon those who broke all and any of the commandments found upon those two tablets of stone long before they appeared in the form given to Moses. Furthermore, these same "10 Laws" are iterated in the New Testament as well. They are perpetually binding upon ALL MEN, not just Christians; more so for them. But NOT unto justification, but as a guide in sanctification.

"Rightly Dividing the Word" unfortunately has its stress upon dividing and not upon rightly, which is characteristic of Dispensational Premillennialism. Fortunately, there are men such as John MacArthur who do not subscribe to this division of Scripture to the extent which the classic Dispensationalists do. "Progressive" is certainly indicative of MacArthur's eschatology and we can only hope and pray the progression continues. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]

As to Matt 5:17, I'm afraid "fulfill" does NOT mean "bring to completion" in the sense of to bring to naught. For a simple reading of the text would show that this would be a clear contradiction of itself:

Matthew 5:17-20 (ASV) "Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven."
May I suggest to you that taken in context, Jesus held a much higher view of the Old Testament and the keeping of the law than did the Scribes and Pharisees, who at every turn sought to distort it and use it to their own advantage. The salvation which the Lord Christ was to accomplish was nothing different than that which was written about centuries prior to His arrival; i.e., salvation by grace by faith in the Messiah Who would make atonement for His people. Thus this "fulfillment" was two-fold. 1) It was set forth in its true spirituality and depth as a means for the true followers of Christ to express their gratitude in holiness of life after the same manner in which He Himself lived before His Father. This statement of Jesus follows His "Sermon on the Mount" where He was addressing those who were believing on Him already. Thus the law, in all its fulness was theirs as a means to produce fruit. (cf. Matt 5:48; Lev. 20:7; 1Pet 1:15, 16). 2) The curse of the law that was to fall upon those who transgressed it was also to be fulfilled in the Lord Christ in His crucifixion. The curse of the law was abrogated for believers in that Christ Jesus' sacrifice was vicarious and substitutionary; i.e., He suffered the penalty of their sins. (cf. 1Cor 5:21). Thus the law is for Christians as a rule of life (sanctification); not as a means to apprehend life (justification).

There are simply far too many references in the N.T. to the "law", decidedly a direct reference to the Moral Law of God which Christians are not to transgress to mention. And because these "10 Laws" are the expression of holiness of God's very nature, it would be impossible for them to be "fulfilled", in the sense of being set aside and not binding upon Christians.

For a couple of excellent article that sets forth this truth see here:

The Law not Abrogated by Christ to Believers

The Moral Law a Rule of Obedience

In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]