Featured John Nelson Darby and Pre-trib-dispensationalism

I won't argue the point on this thread. It is enough for one to remember that the term "replacement theology" is common when referring to covenant view.

The view that held what you are describing is more the historic pre-mil. Generally speaking they have held the Gentiles are grafted into the redeemed of Israel and that group is who will reign with Christ during the millennium.

It is also important to note that some (like Jonathan Edwards) held (imo) to a pre-mil view and covenant theology. Personally, I think he came fairly close to the correct rendering.

 

I did not know you started your own thread on this topic.

You know lets not debate Dispensationalism, but Lordship Salvation vs. Free Grace. Which persuasion are you? I argue for LS and can cite you various passages of scripture that defend the view. Are you ready to listen?

 

Start your own thread on Lordship Salvation.

 

Why would anyone get an infraction for anything said thus far. Quite frankly I find the OP very biased.
Though he may have quoted his "historians" accurately, it was his conclusion that he drew from those quotes that was very false. Just because his "authorities" say thus and thus, does not necessarily mean that most dispensationalists agree with it. That is the false statement made. Nor can he prove that statement.

 

Actually doing some research by looking at books in my library I discovered plenty of evidence for dispensationalism before Darby. Take one example in Johnathan Edwards whom in 1699 wrote a two volume book called A complete History or survey of the dispensations. Or other examples are Isaac Watts (1674-1748) and Pierre Poiret (1546-1719). There are others I could mention that predate Darby whom came around in 1800. But my reading does prove that neither Darby nor the Plymouth Brethren invented dispensationalism.

Sure the Dispensationalism system had different names in the system of Edwards than that of Darby, but even his dispensationalism system differs from that of Scofield, James Brookes and others.

 

1. They cover up their distinctives by trying to lump anyone that has any kind of division as dispensationalist. That is the only way they can date themselves pre Darby which they are so desperate to do.
2. Actually I don't because Ryrie makes it clear that how one views Israel is THE litmus test for if someone is truly a dispensationalist or not. But I will anyways. As far as Dispensationalist are concerned Israel has always and will always be distinct from the church. The church did not start until Pentecost and will continue until the rapture at which time God will go back to dealing with Israel. Where as CT see all saints both old and new making up the church, that believe make up true Israel with Gentiles being grafted into Israel and unbelieving Israel being broken off.
3 I gave the book and page information you should be able to check with that.

 

This is False. Even my Dispensationalist Bible College acknowledge that Dispensatiolism started with Darby. As Ryrie pointed out in his book that I quoted in a previous post seeing dispensations does not a dispensationalist make.

 

I've gotten an infraction from you in past for simply referring to the morphing of dispenationalism into Christion Zionism. I never called anyone a liar and a deceiver, was simply stating the situation as it now is.

I don't think so, I believe it's spot on.

 

Check the chapter on the origins of dispensationalism. It did not start with the brethren.

 

Nope Ryrie can't do it. The best he does is show that breaking the Bible into Dispensations happened before Darby. But he says "In other words, a person can believe in dispensations and even see them in relations to progressive revelation, without being a dispensationalist."

All he does in that chapter is show dispensations of different groups prior to Darby. And then gives reason for Dispensationalism recent history. He can't show that the Sine Qua Non of Dispensationalism exist before Darby, or he would have done so.

 

Darrell Bock (in Progressive Dispensationalism, 1993) places the rise of Dispensationalism with the nineteenth century Brethren Movement from which a host of prominent evangelical personalities emerged; Darby was one of these.
Bock denotes as has been detailed by BlessedWife, that dispensations are not distinctive to Dispensationalism, but the way Dispensationalists define the distinctives of each dispensation definitely differs. Does this definition need development?

He spends more than 40 pages relating the history and the distinctives of Dispensationalism and notes eight "...abiding concerns and emphases that characterize the dispensational tradition"

Common Features of Dispensational Theology

• Authority of Scripture
• Dispensations "The word dispensation refers to a particular arrangement by which God regulates the way human beings relate to Him." (p. 14)
• Uniqueness of the Church
• Practical Significance of the Universal Church
• Significance of Biblical Prophecy
• Futurist Premillennialism
• The Imminent Return of Christ
• A National Future for Israel

Rob

 

It's just not what you want to hear. Anyways why title a chapter the origins of dispensationalism and give example after example of people whom were not dispensationalists? Makes no sense.

 

Here is another book.

The book you asked about is Dispensationalism before Darby: Seventeenth-Century and Eighteenth-Century English Apocalypticism

 

Then quote where he shows anyone that has the sine quo non before Darby. It doesn't exist. Even in that chapter he has to acknowledge that Dispensatiolism comes back to Darby. That is a historical fact.

 

Hogwash. You are just an anti-dispensationalist and refuse to believe.

 

In other words you cannot find an example in Ryrie's book that shows the sine quo non before Darby.

 

Reformed you need some quality time with a Rabbit.

 

Evan: You need to observe a moratorium on your animal references. Does your wife read your posts? Do members of your church? How would you feel if some of those you have witnessed to read your entries here?

 

No. Honestly no mater what I say or quote you won't believe it and still will find an excuse to claim the lie that Darby invented Dispensationalism.

 

From this site
http://www.biblebelievers.com/BlueDISP.html

Some critics assume that dispensationalism is a recent doctrine invented by Dr. C. I. Scofield, editor of the famous Scofield Reference Bible, and J. N. Darby; implying that dispensationalism is a doctrine of modern times and does not have Biblical authority. However, research will show that neither C. I. Scofield or J. N. Darby are the inventors of dispensationalism or the final authority on the subject.

From the first century, writers believed in different economies or administrations. Bible instructor Larry V. Crutchfield, of Baumholder, West Germany, has written an article titled Ages and Dispensations Of The Ante-Nicene Fathers. In it he points out that the Fathers of early church history believed in divisions of history based on God's dealings with man. He states, "Among those whose doctrine of ages and dispensations has survived from the Ante-Nicene period are Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and to a minor degree Victorinus of Petau."

Crutchfield says that "Barnabas' year-day tradition is the earliest budding of the dispensational understanding of God's dealings with man."

Justin Martyr (AD 100-165): according to Crutchfield, Justin believed in four phases of human history in God's program. The first was from Adam to Abraham; the second was from Abraham to Moses; the third was from Moses to Christ; and the fourth was from Christ to the eternal state.

Irenaeus (AD 120-202): The dispensational scheme of Irenaeus is four in number. They are: 1. From the Creation to the Flood. 2. From the Flood to the Law. 3. From the Law to the Gospel. 4. From the Gospel to the Eternal State. He taught that there were four zones of the world and of mankind. He saw a connection between these zones, the faces of the "four living creatures", the four gospels and the four dispensations.