-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Dispensationalism?
- Thread starter DMorgan
- Start date
The article says, "As we have come to expect of him, Dr. MacArthur spoke with great passion, covered much ground quickly, and had a great deal to say. No question, Dr. MacArthur commands authority. One can easily see why Dr. MacArthur is so widely-respected."
Yes, MacArthur commands authority and is widely respected, yet many of his doctrines are stupid. It's a curiosity how so much intellect can be recruited in service of stupid things. It's not just eschatology, either. Although, on MacArthur's website, I do see a sense of MacArthur distancing himself from Dispensationalism. For example, one article starts out with "Let's look a little more closely at the dispensationalist tendency to make unwarranted..." Whoa! He's talking about Dispensationalists like they're someone else.
MacAuthur devotes himself to the rigorous defense of much nonsense, including some popular Baptist fails, like the doctrine that Jesus didn't drink wine. MacAuthur could argue that the moon is made of cheese, and as he did it, he'd be commanding authority and winning respect.
I have great respect for Him......most do.
He is one man however. All of our trusted guides miss it from time to time.
We will never see MacArthur "distance himself" from the fact that there are distinct Dispensations in the differing Ages of administration of God among mankind.
Acknowledging that truth does not make one a Dispensationalist. Nor does acknowledging the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.
The tendency of people to have to have a name they can label others with is one reason why so many refuse to acknowledge simple truths that cross the aisles of the Systems that have arisen. Is one a Catholic because they believe in the Trinity? Is one a Charismatic because they believe that God fills men with His Spirit for the purpose of empowering them for ministry?
While the Seminary may be teaching something I think is necessary people understand, we will have to wait and see how this impacts certain points of MacArthur's Theology. I am hopeful that this will change his understanding on a few points that I feel weakens his doctrine.
Still, John stands as one of the greatest spokesman representatives we have had in recent history. He is always strong in regards to an orthodox view when he interacts with the Media.
God bless.
Acknowledging that truth does not make one a Dispensationalist. Nor does acknowledging the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.
The tendency of people to have to have a name they can label others with is one reason why so many refuse to acknowledge simple truths that cross the aisles of the Systems that have arisen. Is one a Catholic because they believe in the Trinity? Is one a Charismatic because they believe that God fills men with His Spirit for the purpose of empowering them for ministry?
While the Seminary may be teaching something I think is necessary people understand, we will have to wait and see how this impacts certain points of MacArthur's Theology. I am hopeful that this will change his understanding on a few points that I feel weakens his doctrine.
Still, John stands as one of the greatest spokesman representatives we have had in recent history. He is always strong in regards to an orthodox view when he interacts with the Media.
God bless.
Unfortunately, I've heard even some godly dispensationalists make the misleading comment about differing means of salvation. The different standards set by God, as described by many dispensationalists, are unreachable by sinful man, but are meant as "schoolmasters" (Gal. 3:24), intended to cause the sinner to surrender to God rather than relying on works.
There's something wrong in [edit]
Dispensationalists, something found in [edited]. You can lead them to verses that directly refute them, and they still would rather believe things that they can only express [edited].
Ephesians 2 should settle that the church is Israel. But, this is not a new doctrine. Even the Law of Moses teaches this. I've been trying to reason with another post aver the meaning if Exodus 12:48 which basically says converts become citizens of Israel. But, the carnal and unfaithful Israel is not God's people. Hosea 1:9 couldn't be any more plain.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's quite an insult you throw at fellow believers in Christ, brother.
We dispensationalist are blessed that you treat the infirmities of our brains and souls so tenderly and persuasively.
Rob
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for sharing this with us.
I am sure no one will take on these truths.
I accept the label "dispensational", however the I reject any label with a man's name attached to it (shouldn't we all 1 Corinthians 1:12-13).
Dispensationalism's theological (yes it is a systematic theology IMO) platform has been a moving target for 2-3 centuries and some of it just not scriptural.
Basics which I believe are scriptural (although I am sure some brethren will disagree):
There is a scriptural distinction between Israel and the church.
There is and only ever was one gospel in any age based upon the redemption of the Anointed One (Christ - the seed of the woman) as a past, present or future event.
There is a great time of wrath, purification and separation coming upon the earth followed by a 1000 year rule of the Anointed One sitting upon the throne of David.
Then eternity.
HankD
Dispensationalism's theological (yes it is a systematic theology IMO) platform has been a moving target for 2-3 centuries and some of it just not scriptural.
Basics which I believe are scriptural (although I am sure some brethren will disagree):
There is a scriptural distinction between Israel and the church.
There is and only ever was one gospel in any age based upon the redemption of the Anointed One (Christ - the seed of the woman) as a past, present or future event.
There is a great time of wrath, purification and separation coming upon the earth followed by a 1000 year rule of the Anointed One sitting upon the throne of David.
Then eternity.
HankD
Exodus 12:48 teaches that a gentile convert is part of Israel (as "born" of Israel). Ephesians 2 teaches that a gentile convert is part of Israel ("citizens" of Israel).
Galatians 3:29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.
Where's your verses that make a distinction between Israel and the church? Get your doctrine in order.
Where in Ephesian 2 does not say we become citizen's of Israel but at one time in history we were strangers "from the covenants and promise".
HankD
"Remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise... So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God."
These two parallel verses Ephesians 2:12&19, If I have to walk you through this one, [Personal attack edited].
Last edited by a moderator:
Walk me through it Smyth. BTW you have already per-judged me which is forbidden in Scripture.
There is no way you can know one way or another ahead of time that "you don't want to believe it".
Knowing human nature it is possible that this statement could be a ploy to simply say "I told you so" when you were unable to convince me.
I am amendable so I want to learn if indeed you have something of the truth to give the brethren which is the expectation of each of us to edify one another.
To be forthright I am very interested in what you have to say.
There is indeed the fact that the "church" and "Israel" are not mentioned together in a singular way in comparison, so the distinction between the church and Israel is shown by way of practice (no animal sacrifice, etc), ritual (circumcision, etc), polity and organizational (12 tribes,etc...), on and on...
However a single sentence is not the criteria ALONE for a doctrine:
There is no singular way in the scripture to prove the Trinity, it is a composite of several scriptures.
So, please be patient and walk me through it - I mean that sincerely. No GOTCHA, but sincerity. Please believe me.
So, How does Ephesians chapter 2 (Given verse 12 and 19 because the church is not mentioned in chapter 2 but the "household of God") prove that there is no distinction (or difference) between the church of Jesus Christ of:
Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
And the nation of Israel which came by Moses:
Exodus 24:3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.
Thanks
HankD
Last edited:
The Bible says Christians are no longer aliens to Israel, but are fellow citizens. Issue settled.
You're describing Judaism, not Israel. Still, we have a sacrifice better than all the animal sacrifices. The ritual law is fulfilled be Jesus, who makes all things clean. Jesus is our high priest. Who but Christians have a sacrifice to fulfill the law and a high priest? We come close to what you describe than anyone else on Earth. If we are not Israel, there is no Israel.
Yes, I agree about Judaism. There is no biblical Judaism which has 613 "mitzvouth" (or close to that number) a multitude of which cannot be kept because there is no temple in earthly Jerusalem and no identifiable priesthood there either, so Jews today practice something called Talmudic Judaism.
As a matter of fact my own earthly heritage is Jewish (although I was raised as a gentile).
I also agree wholeheartedly with everything you have said in your response except to say that in my understanding Israel is awaiting their re-awakening - what form it will take I don't know. However, we are both (redeemed Israel and the church of the firstborn) the household of God - The Holy Jerusalem - the bride of Christ - the household of God - which is given a distinction in Revelation:
Revelation 21
...
Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
So in my mind the distinction between us (redeemed Israel and the firstborn of the church) is one of distinguishing us apart concerned with the expectations of those who were under the law of Moses awaiting the Messiah and those of the church awaiting His return.
It is a matter of conversational convenience.
So with that understanding personally and for what its worth I have no problem with someone who wants to call the church "Israel".
Galatians 6
15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcised, but a new creature.
16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.
HankD
postman pat
New Member
I would describe myself as a Calvinistic Baptist and Amillennial. Recently I read Griffiths' book Covenant Theology: A Reformed Baptist Perspective. It clarified a number of issues for me, for example, the conditional nature of OT promises about land etc. It clearly shows that all have been saved only by the new covenant.