Baptist Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead

[OldRegular]

Throughout history Baptist have generally believed that the return of Jesus Christ will be followed immediately by a resurrection of all the dead, both the ‘redeemed’ and the ‘lost’, and a general judgment. This conclusion is based on information presented in Baptist Confessions of Faith by William L. Lumpkin. Excerpts from the more prominent Baptist Confessions are presented in the following post!

It is important to note that the implications of a general resurrection and judgment are not trivial in today’s theological climate.

A general resurrection and judgment means that there is no ‘secret rapture of the church’ prior to any period of ‘great tribulation’. The Church will remain on earth until they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory [Matthew 24:30, KJV] and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen [Revelation 1:7, KJV]. Whatever tribulation comes before that time the Church will endure just as Jesus Christ taught and just as the history of the Church bears witness. In fact Scripture teaches repeatedly that tribulation is the norm of life for the Saints, the ‘true believers’.

John F. Walvoord, the preeminent dispensationalist theologian and former president of the Dallas Theological Seminary confesses that the validity of the pre-tribulation ‘rapture’ depends on the definition of the Church [Major Bible Prophecies, page 282]. Before presenting Walvoord’s remarks concerning this question it is worthwhile to consider the definition of the Church as presented in The Baptist Faith and Message [Section VI] adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention in Atlanta, Georgia on June 14, 2000.

The New Testament also speaks of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all the redeemed of all ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.

Walvoord writes, regarding the definition of the church, [Major Bible Prophecies, page 282]:

If the question be asked: Will the church be raptured before end-time events? it becomes very important to define the church as an entity that is distinct from Israel or saints in general. In prophetic passages concerning the Tribulation, both Israelites and Gentiles are described, and some of them have faith in Christ and form a godly remnant. If they are part of the church, then the church is in the Tribulation, and the whole question as to whether the church goes through the Tribulation becomes moot. Many posttribulationists, in an attempt to establish their own point of view, beg the question at the very beginning by assuming that the church includes saints of all ages. The concept that the church is distinct from Israel is a part of dispensational truth that distinguishes the work of God in the Old Testament under the Mosaic Law, the work of God in the present age as he calls out both Jews and Gentiles to form the church as the body of Christ, and the millennial kingdom in which the saints of all ages participate in various ways but maintain their individual and corporate identity. Hence, the church will be raptured or resurrected, and will reign with Christ in the millennial kingdom, but the saved of Israel as well as the saved of the Gentiles who are not part of the church will also be part of the millennial kingdom. Distinguishing the church from saints of other periods that precede or follow the present age is essential to a correct answer on the pretribulational issue. It is not too much to say that the doctrine of the church, or ecclesiology, determines this aspect of eschatology.

We see from the definition of the Church as presented in the Baptist Faith and Message and the remarks by Walvoord that the doctrine of a pretribulation rapture of the Church contradicts current Southern Baptist Doctrine as well as historic Baptist Doctrine.

 

[OldRegular]

Historic Baptist Confessions

The Second London Confession [1677]

Chapter XXXI. Of the State of Man after Death and of the Resurrection of the Dead [Lumpkin, page 293]

“1. The Bodies of Men after Death return to dust and see corruption; but their souls [which neither die nor sleep] having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them; the Souls of the righteous then being made perfect in holiness, are received into Paradise where they are with Christ, and behold the face of God in light and glory; waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and the souls of the wicked, are cast into hell; where they remain in torment and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day; besides these two places for Souls separated from their bodies, the Scripture acknowledgeth none.

2. At the last day such of the Saints as are found alive shall not sleep but shall be changed; and all the dead shall be raised up with the self same bodies, and none other; although with different qualities, which shall be reunited with their Souls again forever.

3. The bodies of the unjust shall by the power of Christ be raised to dishonour; the bodies of the just by His Spirit unto honour, and be made conformable to His own glorious body.”

Chapter XXXII. Of the Last Judgment [Lumpkin, page 294]

“1. God hath appointed a Day wherein He will judge the world in Righteousness, by Jesus Christ; to Whom all power and judgment is given of the Father; in which Day not only the Apostate Angels shall be judged; but likewise all persons that have lived upon the Earth, shall appear before the tribunal of Christ; to give an account of their thoughts, Words, and Deeds, and to receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil.

2. The end of Gods appointing this Day is for the manifestation of the glory of His Mercy, in the Eternal Salvation of the Elect, and of His Justice in the Eternal damnation of the Reprobate who are wicked and disobedient; for then shall the Righteous go into everlasting life, and receive the fullness of Joy, and Glory, with everlasting reward in the presence of the Lord; but the wicked who know not God, and obey not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, shall be cast into Eternal torments, and punished with everlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power.

1. As Christ would have us to be certainly persuaded that there shall be a Day of judgment, both to deter all men from sin and for greater consolation of the godly, in their adversity; so will he have that day unknown to Men, that they may shake off all carnal security, and be always watchful, because they know not at what hour, the Lord will come; and may ever be prepared to say, Come Lord Jesus, Come quickly, Amen.”

The Orthodox Creed [1679]

Article XLIX. Of the State of man after Death and of the Resurrection of the Dead [Lumpkin, page 333]

“The bodies of men after death return to dust and see corruption; but their souls, or spirits, which neither die nor sleep, having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them; the souls of the righteous then being made perfect in holiness, are received into paradise where they are with Christ, and behold the face of God in light and glory; waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and the souls of the wicked, are cast into hell; where they remain in torment and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day. And besides these two places for souls separated from their bodies, the holy scripture mentions none. At the last day such of the saints as are found alive shall not sleep but be changed; and all the dead shall be raised up with the self same bodies and none other; although with different qualities, which shall be reunited with their souls forever and forever, but the bodies of the unjust shall by the power of Christ, as a severe and just judge, be raised to dishonour; and the bodies of the just and righteous by His Spirit, as He is the head of the catholic Church, unto honour, and be made conformable with His glorious body, and shall enjoy everlasting life; in singing perpetual praises and hallelujahs to God for ever and ever. Amen.”

Article L. Of the last Judgment [page 334]

“And lastly, we believe God hath appointed a day, wherein He will judge the world in righteousness, by Jesus Christ, to Whom all power, and judgment is given of the Father; in which day, not only the Apostate Angels shall be judged; but likewise all persons that have lived upon the Earth, shall appear before the tribunal of Christ; to give an account of their thoughts, words, and deeds, and shall receive a just sentence, according to what they have done in their bodies, whether good or evil, when God according to His purpose, will manifest the glory of His mercy, in the salvation of His elect, and of His justice in the eternal damnation of the wicked and disobedient; for then shall the righteous go into everlasting life, and receive the fullness of joy and glory, but the wicked who know not God, nor obey the gospel offered them in Christ, shall be cast into everlasting torments, and punished with everlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power. Amen.”


The New Hampshire Confession [1833]

Article XVIII. Of the World to Come [Lumpkin, page 367]

“We believe that the end of this world is approaching: that at the last day, Christ will descend from heaven, and raise the dead from the grave to final retribution; that a solemn separation will then take place; that the wicked will be adjudged to endless punishment and the righteous to endless joy; and that this judgment will fix forever the final state of men in heaven or hell, on principles of righteousness.”


Southern Baptist Convention [1925 and 1963]

Article X. Last Things [Lumpkin, page 397]

“God, in His own time and in His own way, will bring the world to its appropriate end. According to His promise, Jesus Christ will return personally and visibly in glory to the earth; the dead will be raised; and Christ will judge all men in righteousness. The unrighteous will be consigned to hell, the place of everlasting punishment. The righteous in their resurrected and glorified bodies will dwell forever in heaven with the Lord.”

 

[Dr. Bob]

Think you add a concept of "immediately". One of the joys of reading various Baptist theological interpretations is we agree that Jesus will return. There will be a kingdom. There will be a resurrection.

But the "time frame" is up for wide interpretation. It isn't 1-2-3 in a matter of seconds or minutes or days or even years.

Just as the FIRST advent with its various parts covered 40+ years, so the SECOND advent with various parts may cover "x" years.

Your hatred for biblical dispensational truth shows in your assumptions.

 

[OldRegular]

Think you add a concept of "immediately". One of the joys of reading various Baptist theological interpretations is we agree that Jesus will return. There will be a kingdom. There will be a resurrection.

But the "time frame" is up for wide interpretation. It isn't 1-2-3 in a matter of seconds or minutes or days or even years.

Just as the FIRST advent with its various parts covered 40+ years, so the SECOND advent with various parts may cover "x" years.

Your hatred for biblical dispensational truth shows in your assumptions.

What you call hatred I call Biblical perception.

I do not believe that God left the Church ignorant for 1800 years until John Nelson Darby had a "riding accident" after which in convalescence he developed his concept of two peoples of God. Dispensationalist Thomas Ice in the following link discusses this period of convalescence and Darby's discovery of the pretribulation removal of the Church and two peoples of God, apparently hidden from the people of God for ~1800 years.

From: http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Ice-JohnNelsonDarbyandth.pdf

A PROVIDENTIAL ACCIDENT

At this time, Darby was experiencing a disappointment from a failed spiritual and physical austerity phase in his life, the reality of an Erastian31 church that he believed was in ruins and differed little from the unbelieving world, and his search for an assurance of salvation in his conscience. “Darby’s Christian understanding and experience were about to change radically,”32 notes Brethren historian Tim Grass. As one who began his ministry as a high churchman, Darby was on the verge of becoming an evangelical dissenter when he experienced a riding accident. Darby describes it as follows:

As soon as I was ordained, I went amongst the poor Irish mountaineers, in a wild and uncultivated district, where I remained two years and three months, working as best I could. I felt, however, that the style of work was not in agreement with what I read in the Bible concerning the church and Christianity; nor did it correspond with the effects of the action of the Spirit of God. These considerations pressed upon me from a scriptural and practical point of view; while seeking assiduously to fulfil the duties of the ministry confided to me, working day and night amongst the people, who were almost as wild as the mountains they inhabited. An accident happened which laid me aside for a time; my horse was frightened and had thrown me against a door-post.

This period of Darby’s life is known among Darby scholars as “The Convalescence” during which he experienced “The Deliverance.”34 After the accident, Darby was taken to the home of Susannah Pennefather (1785–1862), his older sister, in Dublin in order to recover. Darby’s convalescence was a time when “the questions in his mind began to resolve themselves.”35 He wrote: “I was troubled in the same way when a clergyman, but never had the smallest shadow of it since.” He declared: “I judge it as Satan: but going from cabin to cabin to speak of Christ, and with souls, these thoughts sprang up, and if I sought to quote a text to myself it seemed a shadow and not real. I ought never to have been there, but do not think that this was the cause, but simply that I was not set free according to Romans viii. As I have said, I have never had it at all since.”

The three or more months Darby spent recuperating from his accident were undoubtedly the most formative period in his life and remarked upon it. In one account he states:

I am daily more struck with the connection of the great principles on which my mind was exercised by and with God, when I found salvation and peace, and the questions agitated and agitating the world at the present day: the absolute, divine authority and certainty of the Word, as a divine link between us and God, if everything (church and world) went; personal assurance of salvation in a new condition by being in Christ; the church as His body; Christ coming to receive us to Himself; and collaterally with that, the setting up of a new earthly dispensation, from Isaiah xxxii. (more particularly the end); all this was when laid aside at E. P.'s in 1827; the house character of the assembly on earth (not the fact of the presence of the Spirit) was subsequently. It was a vague fact which received form in my mind long after, that there must be a wholly new order of things, if God was to have His way, and the craving of the heart after it I had felt long before; but the church and redemption I did not know till the time I have spoken of; but eight years before, universal sorrow and sin pressed upon my spirit. I did not think to say so much of myself; but it is all well. The truth remains the truth, and it is on that we have to go; but the Lord's dealings with the soul, connected with the use of truth, have to be noted.

Further identification of the date and what Darby believed happened to him spiritually during that time is seen in another statement by Darby in a letter in which he wrote, “I believe at my deliverance from bondage in 1827–8, God opened up certain truths needed for the church.”38 What did Darby claim he realized during his convalescence during December 1827 and January 1828? He enumerates five things.

First, Darby says that he realized “the absolute, divine authority and certainty of the Word, as a divine link between us and God,”which caused “the scriptures to gain complete ascendancy over me.”40 Darby confirms an evangelical view of the inspiration and authority of Scripture.

Second, he states: “I came to understand that I was united to Christ in heaven, and that consequently, my place before God was represented by His own.” Again he wrote, “personal assurance of salvation in a new condition by being in Christ; the church as His body.”

Third, Darby understood more fully his present standing with Christ in heaven. Such a heavenly standing becomes the basis for much of Darby’s theology that sees the believer already positioned with Christ in heaven. “I was in Christ, accepted in the Beloved, and sitting in heavenly places in Him. This led me directly to the apprehension of what the true church of God was, those that were united to Christ in heaven.”

Fourth, he says that he realized that he should daily expect the Lord’s return. “At the same time, I saw that the Christian, having his place in Christ in heaven, has nothing to wait for save the coming of the Saviour, in order to be set, in fact, in the glory which is already his portion ‘in Christ.’” Further he says, “I saw in that word the coming of Christ to take the church to Himself in glory.” Darby speaks of “being in Christ; the church as His body; Christ coming to receive us to Himself; . . . all this was when laid aside at E. P.'s in 1827.” Again Darby says of his convalescence discovery: “The coming of the Lord was the other truth which was brought to my mind from the word, as that which, if sitting in heavenly places in Christ, was alone to be waited for, that I might sit in heavenly places with Him.” Such a cluster of beliefs that were formulated at this time provides the rationale for a pretribulational rapture. Darby had seen the importance of an imminent return of Christ for His bride.

Fifth, Darby saw a change in dispensation. This could mean that it was at this time that shifted in his eschatology from postmillennialism to premillennialism. “Christ coming to receive us to Himself; and collaterally with that, the setting up of a new earthly dispensation, from Isaiah xxxii. (more particularly the end); all this was when laid aside at E. P.'s in 1827.”48 He writes of his studies in Isaiah: “Isaiah xxxii. brought me to the earthly consequences of the same truth, though other passages might seem perhaps more striking to me now; but I saw an evident change of dispensation in that chapter, when the Spirit would be poured out on the Jewish nation, and a king reign in righteousness.”49 Isaiah was a very influential part of his studies and change of views during this time. He notes:

In my retreat, the 32nd chapter of Isaiah taught me clearly, on God's behalf, that there was still an economy to come, of His ordering; a state of things in no way established as yet. The consciousness of my union with Christ had given me the present heavenly portion of the glory, whereas this chapter clearly sets forth the corresponding earthly part. I was not able to put these things in their respective places or arrange them in order, as I can now; but the truths themselves were then revealed of God, through the action of His Spirit, by reading His word.

Darby summarized his views that he discovered during his convalescence retreat in Dublin in an issue of The Bible Treasury writing:

Isaiah xxxii. it was that taught me about the new dispensation. I saw there would be a David reign, and did not know whether the church might not be removed before forty years’ time. At that time I was ill with my knee. It gave me peace to see what the church was. I saw that I, poor, wretched, and sinful J. N. D., knowing too much yet not enough about myself, was left behind, and let go, but I was united to Christ in heaven. Then what was I waiting for? J. G. B. came up and said they were teaching some new thing in England. “I have it!” I said.

//snip//

Continued next post.

 

[OldRegular]

DARBY’S NEW THEOLOGICAL PARADIGM

These five biblical discoveries noted above are the basis upon which Darby builds his new theological paradigm that includes dispensationalism and pretribulationalism. From the beginning of Darby’s dissent from the established church, these items were core essentials upon which he began to build his unique theology. Stunt concludes, “it was in these months that finally the questions in his mind began to resolve themselves. Central to his faith from now on was the belief that he and all Christians were ‘united to Christ in heaven’, and delivered ‘by the power of His resurrection.’” Carter sees “its radical distinction between the Jewish and Gentile dispensations—‘the hinge’, as Darby referred to it, . . . the distinction between these two dispensations forms the basis for Darby’s understanding of both ecclesiology and eschatology.” These items are important since pretribulationism is built upon first one’s view of ecclesiology that is set within a certain eschatological framework. Darby perceives a clear distinction between Israel and the church. “It is important to notice here that Darby came to the realization of these points alone, without the influence of other men,” surmised Weremchuk. “Darby’s views, when fully developed later, would prove to be in many points contrary to the ones normally accepted by the church at large.”60 It was during Darby’s convalescence that the original spark of his ideas burst forth from his personal Bible study and fanned into the flames of his theology during the next decade and beyond.

It has been long recognized that pretribulationism is built upon one’s view of ecclesiology as much or more than one’s eschatology. The greatest pretribulationist scholar of the twentieth century was the late John F. Walvoord of Dallas Theological Seminary, who recognized the central place of ecclesiology in support of pretribulationism. Walvoord writes:

What is essential to premillennialism becomes an indispensable foundation in the study of pretribulationism. It is safe to say that pretribulationism depends on a particular definition of the church, and any consideration of pretribulationism that does not take this major factor into consideration will be largely beside the point.

The point that should not be missed regarding Darby’s convalescence discoveries is that they centered on ecclesiology. Darby was concerned about what was happening to the church in which he was involved in Ireland and searched the Bible for answers to his concerns. Stunt notes that one of the assurances Darby received “was the assurance that he (together with all Christians as opposed to Christendom) was risen and spiritually united with Christ in heaven.”62 This ecclesiastical realization forms the heart of Darby’s theology and spiritual hope that extended throughout the rest of his life.

The first two essays written by Darby were both about ecclesiastical issues, which further demonstrates his focus upon understanding the Church. The first, though not published until much later, was the one expressing his disagreement with Archbishop Magee’s petition and the second, from Dublin in 1828, was “Considerations on the Nature and Unity of the Church of Christ.”

Darby did not just develop an ecclesiology that was isolated from interaction with other areas of theology. Rather, he clearly set it against God’s plan for Israel. In one of his convalescence statements he said:

Isaiah xxxii. it was that taught me about the new dispensation. I saw there would be a Davidic reign, and did not know whether the church might not be removed before forty years’ time. At that time I was ill with my knee. It gave me peace to see what the church was. I saw that I, poor, wretched, and sinful J. N. D., knowing too much yet not enough about myself, was left behind, and let go, but I was united to Christ in heaven.

Thus, Darby sees the church as distinct from Israel, since there would be a Davidic reign for Israel in the millennium, God’s earthly people. On the other hand, Darby saw that he was positionally united with Christ in heaven, a heavenly destiny.

Dispensationalists today see such a distinction as their sine qua non. Leading dispensational spokesman Charles Ryrie says, “A dispensationalist keeps Israel and the church distinct.” Ryrie explains:

This is probably the most basic theological test of whether or not a person is a dispensationalist, and it is undoubtedly the most practical and conclusive. The one who fails to distinguish Israel and the church consistently will inevitably not hold to dispensational distinctions; and one who does will

Non-dispensational, covenant theologians recognize this essential about dispensationalists as noted by Michael Williams.

The Darbyist church/Israel distinction constitutes the one great organizing principle of classical dispensationalism. The metaphysical and historical distinction between the church and Israel is the axle upon which the theology of Darby, Scofield, and Chafer rides. It is the one great absolutely necessary or essential element of the system. The Darbyist metaphysical distinction between Israel and the church is the sine qua non of classical dispensational theology.

Whether dispensationalists or non-dispensationalists, all recognize for dispensationalism the importance of the distinction between God’s rule for Israel and His rule for the church.

From the time of his convalescence, Darby developed a theology that taught and supported a dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationism. Essentially Darby came to understand that his place or position was the same as Christ, which is in heaven. Thus, the church is a heavenly people, not an earthly people like the established church, in which he was a clergyman. Juxtaposed to the heavenly and spiritual church was Israel, who are composed of a spiritual, ethnic, and national people on earth who have a future in God’s plan after the church age.

Darby came to understand that the church could be taken to heaven at any moment without signs preceding that event, in what would later be known as the pretribulational rapture of the church. Darby’s realization of a change in dispensations laid the groundwork for the development of dispensationalism, since he saw a distinction between God’s plan for the church and His plan for Israel. By this time, Darby also developed a pessimistic view of the visible church, Christendom, and came to believe that it was in utter ruins.

By January 1828, February at the latest, John Nelson Darby had not only come to an understanding of the idea of pretribulationism, but, he had also come to see other components, along with a rationale to support this view. This does not mean that his ideas relating to pretribulationism came out of the womb fully developed along with no internal contradictions.67 There was still developmental work to be done. Stunt surmises: “In fact for some years after his experience of deliverance there was something decidedly ambivalent about some of the positions adopted by Darby.”68 It would take at least another decade for Darby to develop full confidence in his new views and their implications. The basics were in place by early 1828. This was too early to have received seminal influence from others regarding things Darby strongly contends he came to understand from personal Bible study alone during his Dublin convalescence.

Note: I have omitted the copious footnotes in the article by Dr. Thomas Ice, himself a dispensationalist who coauthored with LeHaye the book Charting the End Times.​

 

[OldRegular]

I have been on this Forum for almost 10 years taking an occasional leave for various reasons. I have expressed my belief that dispensational doctrine does not agree with Scripture and I have expressed that belief as forcefully as I could. However, I have never questioned the salvation of those who disagree with me though I cannot say the same for the opposition.

My expression of disbelief in dispensationalism has routinely been met with hatred toward me and what I consider a true understanding of what Scripture teaches, an understanding that agrees with historic Baptist Doctrine. That understanding of Scripture also includes belief in the Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace in Salvation.

Given the animosity of Dr. Bob and most dispensationalists on this forum toward anyone who questions the revelation given to John Nelson Darby while in convalescence from a riding accident it is pointless to continue my presence on this Board. If the animosity these people extends to others on this forum as it has to me perhaps there will be no one left but dispensationalists.

Whether this thread will be closed, as others have, and my final remarks deleted I have no idea!

I have made the acquaintance of a number of people on this board whose memories I will cherish and I wish them God's richest blessings!

Hubert Baker

 

[Yeshua1]

Throughout history Baptist have generally believed that the return of Jesus Christ will be followed immediately by a resurrection of all the dead, both the ‘redeemed’ and the ‘lost’, and a general judgment. This conclusion is based on information presented in Baptist Confessions of Faith by William L. Lumpkin. Excerpts from the more prominent Baptist Confessions are presented in the following post!

It is important to note that the implications of a general resurrection and judgment are not trivial in today’s theological climate.

A general resurrection and judgment means that there is no ‘secret rapture of the church’ prior to any period of ‘great tribulation’. The Church will remain on earth until they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory [Matthew 24:30, KJV] and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen [Revelation 1:7, KJV]. Whatever tribulation comes before that time the Church will endure just as Jesus Christ taught and just as the history of the Church bears witness. In fact Scripture teaches repeatedly that tribulation is the norm of life for the Saints, the ‘true believers’.

John F. Walvoord, the preeminent dispensationalist theologian and former president of the Dallas Theological Seminary confesses that the validity of the pre-tribulation ‘rapture’ depends on the definition of the Church [Major Bible Prophecies, page 282]. Before presenting Walvoord’s remarks concerning this question it is worthwhile to consider the definition of the Church as presented in The Baptist Faith and Message [Section VI] adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention in Atlanta, Georgia on June 14, 2000.



Walvoord writes, regarding the definition of the church, [Major Bible Prophecies, page 282]:



We see from the definition of the Church as presented in the Baptist Faith and Message and the remarks by Walvoord that the doctrine of a pretribulation rapture of the Church contradicts current Southern Baptist Doctrine as well as historic Baptist Doctrine.

The correct answer is that REFORMED Baptist bethren have seen Eschatrology by the viewpoint of what the Confessions of Faith have held, but the majority of Baptists have taken that from the bible itself alone!

 

[Revmitchell]

We see from the definition of the Church as presented in the Baptist Faith and Message and the remarks by Walvoord that the doctrine of a pretribulation rapture of the Church contradicts current Southern Baptist Doctrine as well as historic Baptist Doctrine.

This is actually not true. The BF&M was intentionally written so that Baptists on both sides of the Isle would accept it. This intention was created by both cals and non cals on the BF&M committee.

For one side to claim exclusivity to their position is just wrongheaded and fails to understand the authors intent in creating the BF&M.

 

[Yeshua1]

This is actually not true. The BF&M was intentionally written so that Baptists on both sides of the Isle would accept it. This intention was created by both cals and non cals on the BF&M committee.

For one side to claim exclusivity to their position is just wrongheaded and fails to understand the authors intent in creating the BF&M.

Hasn't the non reformed baptist position pretty much always held to the imminemt return of Christ?

 

[Iconoclast]

The correct answer is that REFORMED Baptist bethren have seen Eschatrology by the viewpoint of what the Confessions of Faith have held, !

and what view is that? where is it in any Baptist confession?

but the majority of Baptists have taken that from the bible itself alone

what have you taken from the bible itself alone? you do not use the bible:wavey:

 

[Greektim]

The good ole BF&M... I like it because it is very inclusive of many eschatological views, including all the bad ones from dispensationalism (good to be back and give a dig to my dispie brothers out there)

 

[Yeshua1]

The good ole BF&M... I like it because it is very inclusive of many eschatological views, including all the bad ones from dispensationalism (good to be back and give a dig to my dispie brothers out there)

that is how it should be though, as we need to agree on a Second Coming yet to happen, and that there is a immenent returning possible, correct?

And can agree to disagree on the timing issues involved in studying Eschatology?

 

[Greektim]

that is how it should be though, as we need to agree on a Second Coming yet to happen, and that there is a immenent returning possible, correct?

And can agree to disagree on the timing issues involved in studying Eschatology?

Yes... though it is not the "timing" so much as the events leading up to and/or following the coming that there is disagreement.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The good ole BF&M... I like it because it is very inclusive of many eschatological views, including all the bad ones from dispensationalism (good to be back and give a dig to my dispie brothers out there)

Ha ha ha...you go Tim. Long time bro.:wavey:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

and what view is that? where is it in any Baptist confession?



what have you taken from the bible itself alone? you do not use the bible:wavey:

Come on Tony...knock it off....these are weaker brothers.

 

[OldRegular]

The correct answer is that REFORMED Baptist bethren have seen Eschatrology by the viewpoint of what the Confessions of Faith have held, but the majority of Baptists have taken that from the bible itself alone!

The correct answer is that John Nelson Darby, while recovering from a fall off a horse, had an epiphany in which he developed the concept of two peoples of God and a so-called "snatching away" of the heavenly people, the Church. That is clearly stated in Darby's own words according to the report by dispensational author, Thomas Ice {from post #4 above}:

In my retreat, the 32nd chapter of Isaiah taught me clearly, on God's behalf, that there was still an economy to come, of His ordering; a state of things in no way established as yet. The consciousness of my union with Christ had given me the present heavenly portion of the glory, whereas this chapter clearly sets forth the corresponding earthly part. I was not able to put these things in their respective places or arrange them in order, as I can now; but the truths themselves were then revealed of God, through the action of His Spirit, by reading His word.

Darby summarized his views that he discovered during his convalescence retreat in Dublin in an issue of The Bible Treasury writing:

:
Isaiah xxxii. it was that taught me about the new dispensation. I saw there would be a David reign, and did not know whether the church might not be removed before forty years’ time. At that time I was ill with my knee. It gave me peace to see what the church was. I saw that I, poor, wretched, and sinful J. N. D., knowing too much yet not enough about myself, was left behind, and let go, but I was united to Christ in heaven. Then what was I waiting for? J. G. B. came up and said they were teaching some new thing in England. “I have it!” I said.

Ice then summarizes what Darby accomplished {See post #5}:

From the time of his convalescence, Darby developed a theology that taught and supported a dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationism. Essentially Darby came to understand that his place or position was the same as Christ, which is in heaven. Thus, the church is a heavenly people, not an earthly people like the established church, in which he was a clergyman. Juxtaposed to the heavenly and spiritual church was Israel, who are composed of a spiritual, ethnic, and national people on earth who have a future in God’s plan after the church age.

Darby came to understand that the church could be taken to heaven at any moment without signs preceding that event, in what would later be known as the pretribulational rapture of the church. Darby’s realization of a change in dispensations laid the groundwork for the development of dispensationalism, since he saw a distinction between God’s plan for the church and His plan for Israel. By this time, Darby also developed a pessimistic view of the visible church, Christendom, and came to believe that it was in utter ruins.

By January 1828, February at the latest, John Nelson Darby had not only come to an understanding of the idea of pretribulationism, but, he had also come to see other components, along with a rationale to support this view. This does not mean that his ideas relating to pretribulationism came out of the womb fully developed along with no internal contradictions.67 There was still developmental work to be done. Stunt surmises: “In fact for some years after his experience of deliverance there was something decidedly ambivalent about some of the positions adopted by Darby.”68 It would take at least another decade for Darby to develop full confidence in his new views and their implications. The basics were in place by early 1828. This was too early to have received seminal influence from others regarding things Darby strongly contends he came to understand from personal Bible study alone during his Dublin convalescence.

Those who believe the dispensational teaching can deny all they want that Darby is the inventor of dispensationalism but Ice {One more time, Ice is himself a dispensational writer.} shows otherwise. Note once again what Nelson Ice says about Darby:

Darby’s realization of a change in dispensations laid the groundwork for the development of dispensationalism, since he saw a distinction between God’s plan for the church and His plan for Israel. By this time, Darby also developed a pessimistic view of the visible church, Christendom, and came to believe that it was in utter ruins.

Now folks I ask you to read Isaiah 32 and see if it supports what Darby developed which, as Ryrie claims, is the "sine qua non" of Classic Dispensationalism. I would also note that Darby's pessimistic view of the Church continues among dispensationalists in the present time. This in spite of the promise of the Lord Jesus Christ:

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.

Matthew 28:19, 20
19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

I would also note that contrary to what some have stated the Southern Baptist Faith and Message of both 1963 and 2000 is very clear regarding who constitute the Church. The 1963 version states:

"The New Testament speaks also of the church as the body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages."

The 2000 version states:

"The New Testament speaks also of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation."

There is nothing ambiguous about either statement. Furthermore, there is nothing ambiguous about Walvoord's assessment of what these statements mean relative to the revelation Darby claims to have received. From the OP:

Walvoord writes, regarding the definition of the church, [Major Bible Prophecies, page 282]:

If the question be asked: Will the church be raptured before end-time events? it becomes very important to define the church as an entity that is distinct from Israel or saints in general. In prophetic passages concerning the Tribulation, both Israelites and Gentiles are described, and some of them have faith in Christ and form a godly remnant. If they are part of the church, then the church is in the Tribulation, and the whole question as to whether the church goes through the Tribulation becomes moot. Many posttribulationists, in an attempt to establish their own point of view, beg the question at the very beginning by assuming that the church includes saints of all ages. The concept that the church is distinct from Israel is a part of dispensational truth that distinguishes the work of God in the Old Testament under the Mosaic Law, the work of God in the present age as he calls out both Jews and Gentiles to form the church as the body of Christ, and the millennial kingdom in which the saints of all ages participate in various ways but maintain their individual and corporate identity. Hence, the church will be raptured or resurrected, and will reign with Christ in the millennial kingdom, but the saved of Israel as well as the saved of the Gentiles who are not part of the church will also be part of the millennial kingdom. Distinguishing the church from saints of other periods that precede or follow the present age is essential to a correct answer on the pretribulational issue. It is not too much to say that the doctrine of the church, or ecclesiology, determines this aspect of eschatology.

 

[Yeshua1]

was the Church in the OT then?

And since Amil/post mil views came in much later into the Church then pre Mil, do we doscount those views also as being a later date?

And were the OT believers then in the Church or not?

 

[OldRegular]

was the Church in the OT then?

And since Amil/post mil views came in much later into the Church then pre Mil, do we doscount those views also as being a later date?

The major error in dispensationalism is that God has two peoples. That is apparently the revelation that Darby received during his convalescence from falling off a horse and which Ryrie calls the "sine qua non", the essential belief, of {Classic} dispensationalism.

And were the OT believers then in the Church or not?

The Church consists of all the redeemed as the the Southern Baptist Faith and Message of both 1963 and 2000 clearly state. The 1963 version states:

"The New Testament speaks also of the church as the body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages."

The 2000 version states:

"The New Testament speaks also of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation."

 

[Yeshua1]

The major error in dispensationalism is that God has two peoples. That is apparently the revelation that Darby received during his convalescence from falling off a horse and which Ryrie calls the "sine qua non", the essential belief, of {Classic} dispensationalism.



The Church consists of all the redeemed as the the Southern Baptist Faith and Message of both 1963 and 2000 clearly state. The 1963 version states:



The 2000 version states:

God has only "One people" the saved from all ages, but there is a national isreal and the Church in the scriptures, each with their own promises!

And those in the Church are those saved during time of jesus forward, correct?

 

[OldRegular]

God has only "One people" the saved from all ages, but there is a national isreal and the Church in the scriptures, each with their own promises!

There is a national Israel but within that nation there was always a group that were the true believers; Jacob, Joseph, Judah, Moses, Samuel, King David, the 7000 the prophet Elijah mentioned, and thousands more, those whom the Apostle Paul called "the Elect". All these constitute spiritual Israel. Beyond these there are all the faithful typified by those mentioned in Hebrews 11! The Apostle Paul tells us:

Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

There is only one Gospel, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, of which the Apostle Paul says: Romans 1:16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. And Paul says that Gospel was preached to Abraham, and Scripture tells us that Abraham believed and it was accounted to him for righteousness!.

And those in the Church are those saved during time of jesus forward, correct?

No not correct. Read the previous post and the OP for the correct answer!