Dispensational Truth - In Time & Eternity

[JD731]

I had to show that dispensationalists are believers in what the Bible says so I am continuing the thread on Dispensationalism.

There isn't a 'millennial reign of Christ' that takes place on Earth mentioned anywhere in the Bible, so who is it that's got a perverted view?

Not in the Book. You don't have Bible on that.

Bible believing Christians do no rejoice over bold illogical and unreasonable statements like this. I sure don't. I am saddened by it.

Re 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy [is] he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom [is] as the sand of the sea.
9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

The passage says a thousand years , which is a millennium.
The saints are resurrected to reign.
With whom? Christ.
Where? on the earth.

Where is Christ at this time? He is on the earth having returned from heaven in chapter 19. Read it now.

It is not as innocent as a difference of opinion with Bible believers when you deny the plain sense of simple words and say they are not true. Someone who can read these words and boldly say they are not true as you have done is refuting an eye witness account by an apostle of the Lord, namely John, who was told by the Lord to write what he saw. In verse 1 of chapter 20 he wrote that he saw an angel come down from heaven and bind Satan and imprison him for a thousand years. Afterward, in verse 4 he said he saw thrones and resurrected martyrs who had been killed for their faith reigning with Jesus Christ on earth over the nations for a thousand years after having been resurrected from the dead. You seem to be saying that John did not see these things.

Revelation 1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it (the book, the revelation) unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Ps 115:16 The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD S: but the earth hath he given to the children of men.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

Copy of post: Dispensationalism

Dispensationalism, O.P.​

WHAT IS A “DISPENSATION”?
And first, as regards the meaning of the word 'dispensation' itself, it is easily to be seen, that the Biblical meaning thereof is radically different from that assigned to it by the “Scofield Bible,” where it is stated that:–

"LET us at this point inquire what, if any, support the Bible lends to the basic idea of Modern dispensationalism, namely, that God has divided all time (past and future) into seven distinct and clearly distinguishable “dispensations;” and that in each of those “dispensations” He deals with mankind upon 'a special plan' and upon 'peculiar principles that differ from those of all the others'.

"But in our English Version of the Scriptures the word “dispensation” is not in a single instance used to designate 'a period of time', whatsoever.

Thank you for helping me rebut dispensationalism.

You're saying that you are rebutting the claims of the 'UN-revised dispensationalism', or proving they are false?

No one in revised dispensationalism defines a dispensation as "a period of time."

So, only the 'UN-revised dispensationalism' refers to a dispensation as "a period of time"?

What is a 'dispensation' to a revised dispensationalist, if it is not "a period of time"?

Even in Pink's day, Lewis Sperry Chafer did not define it that way.

Chafer may have started out using the actual definition of the word 'dispensation' to refer to a 'dispensing', based on its Latin roots, but even with that, he adopts the idea of this thing he is talking about being 'in various ages'.

"The word dispensation is twofold in its import: (1) It may refer to a dispensing or an administration or (2) to an abrogation of standards or existing laws -- such are the dispensations practiced by the Church of Rome."

"The word dispensation is Latin in its origin, being derived from dispensation -- economical management or superintendence -- and has its equivalent in the Greek _oikonomia, meaning, in this specific usage, 'stewardship' or 'economy' as to special features of divine government in the various ages."

Then, when he goes on into a 'dispensation's' "bearing on the theological import of the word", he says, "The method or scheme by which God has at different times, etc.

"To quote the Century Dictionary bearing on the theological import of the word: "(a) The method or scheme by which God has at different times developed his purpose, and revealed himself to man; or the body of privileges bestowed, and duties and responsibilities enjoined, in connection with that scheme or method of revelation:..."

Interestingly enough, distinguishing only TWO DISPENSASTIONS, HERE:

"...as the Old or Jewish dispensation; the New Gospel dispensation.

Then, he continues further with his idea of a dispensation being, "(b) A period
and startlingly again, he gives only TWO DISPENSATIONS to illustrate those TWO PERIODS OF TIME.

"(b) A period marked by a particular development of the divine purpose and revelation: as the patriarchal dispensation (lasting from Adam to Moses); the Mosaic dispensation (from Moses to Christ); the Christian dispensation."

Then, when he goes to the Century Dictionary, he gives us their definition of a dispensation as being, "The limits of certain dispensational periods";

"The Century Dictionary also quotes one pertinent sentence from Bibliotheca Sacra of sixty-two years ago: "The limits of certain dispensational periods were revealed in Scripture" (XLV, 237)."

The the clincher for showing the embellishment and altering of the meaning of the word 'dispensation', in its entirety, he references the co-author of these changing meanings, to none other than who had to write his own version of the Bible, to impress upon its readers the etymology of their combined error, when he declares, "A dispensation is a period of time"

"In the light of this material, the definition advanced by the late Dr. C.I. Scofield (Scofield Reference Bible, p. 5), namely, "A dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God,..."

Then, he adds that that shift in meaning "...is hardly entitled to the criticism which is aimed against it", which sounds really pretty as an empty bluff, but plenty of others have been wise enough to call their bluff.

Then, all the flowery dispensary of enchanting

"How to Persuade Someone Using Psychology – 7 Tricks"​

using "Ultimate terms”, such as "It is not intended by it to imply that those who hold what are here set forth as dispensational beliefs are abnormal or disproportionate in doctrine. This thesis purports to demonstrate that so-called dispensationalists find the specific meaning of the Scriptures which God intended to impart and are therefore, by the most exacting proofs, found to be both reasonable and normal in their interpretations.

Let's do the math.

"dispensationalists find the specific meaning of the Scriptures
which God intended to impart"

+ "are therefore, by the most exacting proofs"

= "found to be both reasonable and normal in their interpretations."

Whew. Laying it on THICK.

(Poor JD731, he's been suckered into every word of that kind of scam artistry).

 

[canadyjd]

There are several repeating themes in Revelation 20. The mention of the thrones, the martyrs, Satan, Christ ruling.

The thrones, martyrs, Christ ruling, as mentioned several times earlier in Revelation, are all occurring in heaven.

Satan being cast out of heaven, making war against the saints, pursuing the woman and her children, all occur on the earth.

Revelation 20 does not say Christ reigns on the earth. That completely takes the passage out of context.

The context of Revelation 20 is the reward the martyrs receive for staying faithful in the midst of persecution… they reign with Christ for 1000 years.

Even if Satan is loosed for that time to wreck havoc upon the earth, doesn’t mean Christ is ruling on the earth for the 1000 years.

Peace to you

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

Copy of post: Dispensationalism

"Paul says, “A dispensation of the Gospel is committed to me” (I Cor. 9:17); that is to say, the Gospel had been entrusted to him to be dispensed by him.

This is complete baloney. No dispensational theology treats a dispensation as something to be "dispensed." That has nothing to do with either the English or the Greek.

Right and that's the same as saying, "No dispensational theology treats a dispensation as something to be "dispensed", as defined by the Bible where Paul says, “A dispensation of the Gospel is committed to me” (I Cor. 9:17); where Paul is properly using the definition of the word 'dispensation', where he means, "the Gospel had been entrusted to him to be dispensed by him."

"And the word has a similar intent, definition, import, and connotation conveying its meaning in other passages, all its occurrences being in the writings of the apostle Paul. Thus in Ephesians 1:10 the word 'dispensation' is a reference to “the dispensation of the fulness of the times”; and the Apostle is there speaking of that which God had Purposed to administer or dispense in these Last Days. (“The fulness of the time,” according to Galatians 4:4, is the Era when “God sent forth His Son.”).

Again, "dispensed" is baloney. No dispensational theologian holds to that: Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Ryrie, Vlach, etc. It is in fact the "etymological fallacy."

"Again in Ephesians 3:2 Paul speaks of “the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward”; the meaning being that the ministry given him was to dispense the grace of God to the Gentiles.

And lastly, in Colossians 1:25 he refers to “the dispensation of God,” that had been given him, “to fulfil the word of God”; the reference being to that which God had made him responsible to administer or dispense, in fulfilment of the word of God concerning His previously concealed Purpose as to the salvation of the Gentiles.

"These are all the occurrences of the word "dispensation",
in the New Testament.
Click to expand...

But there are other usages where the Greek word oikomenos (οἰκόμενος) is translated differently.

Right, by 'usage' in modern theological definitions, now since the 'dispensationalists' have made a lapse in reality with it, by changing the meaning from a 'dispensing', to 'a period of time', even though you say they don't refer to 'a dispensation' as 'a period of time.'

You say dispensationalists don't refer to a 'dispensation' as either 'a dispersing', or as 'a period of time', so what's it going to be, one way or the other, or elsewhere where, "the Greek word oikomenos (οἰκόμενος)", (or Strong's Greek: 3622. οἰκονομία (oikonomia) -- stewardship, administrations) "is translated differently."

Like, such as what?

But Pink, having quit Moody Bible Institute without completing a single semester wouldn't know that, because he had no Greek or Hebrew training.

Maybe, but as a lawyer, Philip Mauro, seems to have added to his skill set to study the Bible better and it's his article we're looking at.

And just checking with AI it comes up with:

"To enhance understanding of biblical texts, Philip Mauro's Greek and Hebrew training includes the following elements:

• "Studied classical Greek to grasp New Testament language nuances.
• Learned Hebrew for deeper insights into the Old Testament scriptures.
• Engaged in comparative analysis of translations and original texts.
• Focused on historical context to enrich interpretation of scripture.
• Participated in discussions and lectures to refine theological perspectives.
• Utilized resources like lexicons and concordances for accurate word meanings."

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

"In the English Version of the Bible, therefore, the word “dispensation” always means administration, or stewardship.

This makes more sense, so he is partially right.

Yes, that's what the word 'dispensation' expresses, but no, please don't go there and call him a 'partial dispensationalist'. Unless, that 'partial' only involves him having defined the word for what it has always been.

"Our English word “economy” comes directly from the Greek word rendered “dispensation” in the four passages above referred to.

This is baloney. "Economy" does not come from the Greek word,
which is (as above) oikomenos.

I see the spelling as 'oikonomian':
Meaning: commission
οἰκονομίαν (oikonomian)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 3622: Management of household affairs, stewardship, administration. From oikonomos; administration; specially, a 'economy'."

Strong's Greek: 3622. οἰκονομία (oikonomia) -- 9 Occurrences

economy(n.)
1530s, "household management," from Latin oeconomia (source of French économie, Spanish economia, German Ökonomie, etc.), from Greek oikonomia "household management, thrift," from oikonomos "manager, steward," from oikos "house, abode, dwelling" (cognate with Latin vicus "district," vicinus "near;" Old English wic "dwelling, village," from PIE root *weik- (1) "clan") + nomos "managing," from nemein "manage" (from PIE root *nem- "assign, allot; take").

Search 'economy' on etymonline

Search results for 'economy' on etymonline

www.etymonline.com

"economy", Etymology, Noun:

"Middle English yconomye, borrowed from Middle French yconomie, economie, borrowed from Medieval Latin yconomia, economia, oekonomia (Late Latin, "organization of the Trinity, plan, dispensation," Latin oeconomia "arrangement of material by an author,"), borrowed from Greek oikonomía "management of a household, direction, arrangement," from oikonómos "manager of a household, steward," (from oîkos "house" + -nomos, noun derivative of némein "to have management or control of, rule, direct") + -ia -y entry 2 — more at vicinity, nimble.."

Definition of ECONOMY

the structure or conditions of economic life in a country, area, or period; also : an economic system; thrifty and efficient use of material resources : frugality in expenditures; also : an instance or a means of economizing : saving… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

"Descendants"​

• Greek: οικονόμος (oikonómos, “housekeeper, steward; frugal or thrifty person”)
  • οικονομικός (oikonomikós, “economic, financial, fiscal; thrifty, economical”)
  • οικονομικά (oikonomiká, “study of economics”)
  • οικονομία (oikonomía, “economy, saving, thrift”)
• → Old Georgian: ჳკონომოსი (wiḳonomosi)

References:​

• “οἰκονόμος”, in Liddell & Scott (1889), An Intermediate Greek–English Lexicon, New York: Harper & Brothers
• “οἰκόνομος”, in Liddell & Scott (1940), A Greek–English Lexicon, Oxford: Clarendon Press
• G3623 in Strong, James (1979), Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance to the Bible"

οἰκονόμος - Wiktionary, the free dictionary

en.wiktionary.org

"It is to be deplored that a Biblical word of definite intent, definition, import, and connotation conveying its meaning should have been chosen for the purpose of this New System of Doctrine, and a radically different intent, definition, import, and connotation conveying its meaning assigned to it."

Philip Mauro: The Gospel of the Kingdom (1927) – Preterist Archives​

preteristarchives.org
Satan apparently leaves some extremely strategic vulnerable loopholes and telling clues in his supernaturally evil schemes that God allows to be left in place for the whole world to see, if you look for them and believe the Bible, instead of him.

Like the Holly Rollers who believe they are Sanctified 'holy', when the Bible says, 'wholly'.

Or the premillennial, postmillennial, or premillennial dispensationalists who think an Earthly Reign of Jesus is contained within the verse in Revelation 20:4, which speaks of 'a thousand years'.

Actually the "1000" occurs 6 times in several verses there in Rev. 20.

Of those 6 occurrences of "1000" in these several verses there in Revelation 20, which one contains anything remotely associated with, "an Earthly Reign of Jesus"?

1 "And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

3 "And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

4 "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

7 "And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,"

I understand what the word “dispensation” always means when it is used in the Bible.

Try to understand it, too.

Yes, I try to do that. I have a whole lecture on that in my course on Dispensational Theology.

That's something. Be sure to continue 'revising' all of it, hopefully until it is completely unrecognizable as being anything that still has to do with what some profess to believe in as any kind of "Dispensational Theology".

It came about very recently out of nothing and does not stand the test of time, or dispensing.

 

[John of Japan]

This post by Alan is so mixed up it's hard to know where my words are and where his are. But he makes a good point or two, so I'll try to answer what I can.

Right and that's the same as saying, "No dispensational theology treats a dispensation as something to be "dispensed", as defined by the Bible where Paul says, “A dispensation of the Gospel is committed to me” (I Cor. 9:17); where Paul is properly using the definition of the word 'dispensation', where he means, "the Gospel had been entrusted to him to be dispensed by him."

I deleted what I wrote and will answer what he wrote.

Again, no dispensationalist uses the word "dispense" concerning a dispensation. It does not mean "dispense" in Greek or English. Just because the etymology is the same does not mean the meaning is the same. Again, this is called the etymological fallacy. Here is a definition of this: "The notion that the 'true' meaning of a word is the one to be expected from its etymology" (P. H. Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics, p. 128). Etymology, also called historical linguistics, is the study of word origins and the history of them.

So, "dispensation" has nothing to do with "dispense," even though they have similar etymologies. furthermore, the meaning in Bible translations goes back to 1611, when it meant "management."

Right, by 'usage' in modern theological definitions, now since the 'dispensationalists' have made a lapse in reality with it, by changing the meaning from a 'dispensing', to 'a period of time', even though you say they don't refer to 'a dispensation' as 'a period of time.'

The word "dispensation" in dispensational theology does not (repeat not) mean a period of time. It means a stewardship given to mankind. This is widely misunderstood, especially on the Internet, where so much garbage appears!

The Greek word is defined: "literally, relating to the task of an οἰκονομία (steward) in household administration stewardship, management (LU 16.2)" (Friberg, Friberg and Miller, Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament).

You say dispensationalists don't refer to a 'dispensation' as either 'a dispersing', or as 'a period of time', so what's it going to be, one way or the other, or elsewhere where, "the Greek word oikomenos (οἰκόμενος)", (or Strong's Greek: 3622. οἰκονομία (oikonomia) -- stewardship, administrations) "is translated differently."

Like, such as what?

The word appears 7 times in the NT. In Luke 2:1-4 it is used 3 times of the unjust steward (a cognate word), and translated "stewardship." It occurs 4 other times translated as "dispensation." So, in dispensational theology we mean by this word that God has given (and will give) to all mankind a stewardship that mankind must fulfill. Every time mankind fails, thus giving glory to God. So the foundational theology is doxological.

Maybe, but as a lawyer, Philip Mauro, seems to have added to his skill set to study the Bible better and it's his article we're looking at.

I didn't know it was Mauro. I did not see where you cited him. He was a much better theologian than Pink. Still, he was a disaffected dispensationalist. The disaffected usually have an ax to grind, and he did too.

And just checking with AI it comes up with:

Please spare me from AI. I hate it. It will ruin scholarship and the use of brains.

 

[John of Japan]

This makes more sense, so he is partially right.

Yes, that's what the word 'dispensation' expresses, but no, please don't go there and call him a 'partial dispensationalist'. Unless, that 'partial' only involves him having defined the word for what it has always been.

This is baloney. "Economy" does not come from the Greek word,
which is (as above) oikomenos.

Good job of research. I was mistaken. The word "economy" does come from the Greek word.

I see the spelling as 'oikonomian':
Meaning: commission
οἰκονομίαν (oikonomian)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 3622: Management of household affairs, stewardship, administration. From oikonomos; administration; specially, a 'economy'."

This is not simply a different spelling, but the accusative of oikonomia. And oikonomos is the word for steward, not stewardship.

Of those 6 occurrences of "1000" in these several verses there in Revelation 20, which one contains anything remotely associated with, "an Earthly Reign of Jesus"?

Yes, absolutely. It says just that. We reign with Him on earth.

 

[JD731]

The oft misunderstood Revelation has been discussed so much in the context of dispensationalism that I am going to make a post about it.

The Revelation, I think, must be viewed and understood in a dispensational framework. It has a three fold division, past, present, and future. That is the outline given to John, who wrote it.

First, one must understand it is for the most part a prophesy. A prophesy is details of something that will happen in the future. The Revelation is a prophesy of actual events.

Re 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
Re 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time [is] at hand.

John mentioned three things about himself relative to the Revelation.

Re 1:2 Who bare record of 1) the word of God, and of 2) the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all 3) things that he saw.

The context of the first 3 chapters = the church on earth.

Re 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

In context then, Jesus says his relationship to the church is this.

The beginning of the church: (Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead)
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

The completion of the church = the rapture of the church.
Ro 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Two things:
1) The completion of the church
2) The end of blindness to Israel

Re 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending (of the church), saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dispensationalists will readily see this next but I will show it to others.

The Revelation was divided by Jesus himself into three (3) parts. It was past, present, and future. It was all, every word a prophecy. A prophecy is information about events that will take place from the present time you receive it. So John wrote a prophecy about the last 3 millennial days of the 7 millennial day week as God counts days in 94 AD.

1) first it was a vision of the glorified Christ that John saw. This was in the past. It had just happened before his command from Jesus Christ to write.
2) second, the churches are, presently. They are the ones who are addressed.
3) third, beginning in chapter 4 he is told to write the things that will be hereafter.

19 Write the things 1) which thou hast seen, and 2) the things which are, and 3)the things which shall be hereafter;

The things he had seen - Re 1:9-18
The things that are - Re 1:19- 3:22 (the extended time of the two days of the church on earth)
The things that shall be hereafter - Re 4:1 - 22:21

The church of this age, whether in Matt 13, or the 13 epistles of Paul, or here in the Revelation is said to be a mystery.

Matt 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Why?
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

Because they do not believe the words and honor the context.

Eph 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

Rev 1 :22 - 20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.

Seven, because 7 represents the complete church age.

Here is the rapture when the church is taken out of the world to heaven and is no longer mentioned on the earth.

Re 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.
2 And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

How quickly does the rapture take place? Look here.

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Hereafter what? The church on earth!

It is not a sign that one is not saved if he cannot see these mysteries of the church in this age because it could be because of weak teaching or deceit through philosophy or even immaturity in the faith, or a plethora of new bibles but it might be that God has not enlightened the mind and given eyes that you can see and you are following the doctrines of men because that is all you have. Whatever the case it is not okay with God to deny the words of his prophesy. The souls of men are at stake.

Here is the prayer of Paul concerning two (2) consecutive dispensations, the dispensation of the grace of God and the dispensation of the fullness of times, which is the next dispensation.

Eph 1:15 Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints,
16 Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers;
17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world (aion = age), but also in that (aion= world) which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

I urge all to believe a thousand years is a literal thousand years in Re 20. From Re 4 to Re 20 is the 7 years of tribulation.

The end of the week is a purged earth of both sin and sinners and a new heaven and a new earth.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

Of those 6 occurrences of "1000" in these several verses there in Revelation 20, which one contains anything remotely associated with, "an Earthly Reign of Jesus"?

Yes, absolutely. It says just that. We reign with Him on earth.

4 "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

dispensationalism by LEWIS SPERRY CHAFER 1871-1952​

In this article Mr. Chafer waxes gratuitous in his presumptions assertions, by just acting like a Reign of Jesus 'on Earth' is entirely self-evident, or something; "In the light of the unqualified statements of the Scriptures, is it not pertinent to inquire whether, had Jehovah intended to establish a Davidic throne and kingdom on earth with David's Son as the eternal occupant of that throne, He could have employed language with any more clearness and precise meaning..."

The problem is, despite your gratuitous assertion fallacy, "It says just that. We reign with Him on earth", the Bible does not even give any hint that there might be a Reign of Jesus on Earth, in association with God's Revelation of what He says takes place for 'a thousand years', in the verse which speaks of who it is that "Reigns with Christ".

The Vision of ‘the Souls of them
that had been Beheaded for the Testimony of Jesus'

“2. The Reign of the Saints (20: 4-6) In order to arrive at a proper conception of these verses, we must again go back in our thoughts to the First Century AD. Roman persecutions are raging. Martyrs are calmly laying their heads under the executioner’s sword. Paul had already done this; also James. Rather than say, ‘The Emperor is Lord’, or drop incense on the altar of a pagan priest as a token of worshipping the Emperor, believers confess their Christ even in the midst of the flames and while they are thrown before the wild beasts in the Roman amphitheaters.

“But Christ is not unmindful of His grievously afflicted Disciples. He sustains them in order that they may remain faithful to the End. For that very reason He gives to His sorely tried Church The Vision of ‘the Souls of them that had been Beheaded for the Testimony of Jesus' (1: 2, 9; 6: 9).”

1:2 ”Who bare record of the Word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.”

1:9 ”I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the Kingdom and Patience of Jesus Christ, was in the Isle that is called Patmos, for the Word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.”

6:9 ”And when he had opened the Fifth Seal, I saw under the Altar the souls of them that were slain for the Word of God, and for the testimony which they held:”

“He describes these souls—together with those of all departed Christians who had confessed their Lord upon Earth—as Reigning with Jesus in Heaven. He says, in effect, “Here below: a few years of suffering: there, in that better land above, they live and Reign with Christ ‘a thousand years’!” What a comfort! Certainly, the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the Glory which is Revealed to the souls of believers Reigning with their Exalted Lord in Heaven!

“In connection with this ‘thousand year Reign’ of verses 4-6 we shall answer three questions.

"First, where does this ‘thousand year Reign’ take place?

“According to the passage which we are considering it takes place in three places.

• The ‘thousand year’ Reign occurs where the Thrones are, for we read: “And I saw Thrones and they sat upon them.” Now, according to the entire book of Revelation, the Throne of Christ and of His people is invariably in Heaven (Rev. 1: 4; 3: 21; 4: 2 if.; etc. ).
• The ‘thousand year’ Reign also occurs where the disembodied souls of the Martyrs are, for we read: “And I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus.” John sees souls, not bodies. He is thinking of souls without bodies, for we read: “of them that had been beheaded”. In this entire passage there is not a single word about a Resurrection of bodies. The distinction between soul and body is even emphasized: “the souls of them that had been beheaded”. True, the term ‘souls' at times means ‘people’ (e. g. Gn. 46: 27). But in that case you can substitute the term ‘people’ for ‘souls’. Here in Revelation 20 you cannot do so. The souls Reign during this entire present Gospel Era of the Lord’s Churches until Christ’s Second Coming. Afterwards, it is no longer the souls that Reign, for then body and soul are together again. Then the saints Reign, not for a limited though lengthy period—'a thousand years’—but ‘for ever and ever’ (22: 5).
• The ‘thousand year’ Reign also occurs where Jesus Lives, for we read “And they Lived and Reigned with Christ....” The question is, where, according to the Apocalypse, is the place from which the exalted Mediator Rules the Universe? Where does Jesus Live? Clearly, it is in Heaven. It is in Heaven that the Lamb is represented as taking the Scroll out of the Hand of Him that sat on the Throne (Rev. 5). Revelation 12 clearly states that Christ was “Caught up to God and to His Throne... Therefore, rejoice O Heavens, and ye that dwell therein”. We may safely say, therefore, that the ‘thousand year’ Reign takes place in Heaven.

Con't

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

"The next question that has to be answered is,

What is the character of The Vision of ‘the Souls
of them that had been Beheaded for the Testimony of Jesus'?

"The nature of this Reign may be summarized in four ways as follows.

"(i) It is Judging with Christ. The Ransomed souls in Heaven praise Christ for His Righteous Judgments. They constantly sing: “True and Righteous are His Judgments.” These souls in Glory are constantly pictured as taking part in all the activities of the Master:

“they sit down with Him in His Throne, 3:21; “To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with Me in My Throne, even as I also Overcame, and am Set Down with My Father in His Throne”;

“they stand with Him on Mount Zion, cf 14: 1; “And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb Stood on the Mount Sion, and with Him an hundred forty and four thousand, having His Father's Name written in their Foreheads”;

“they sing before His Throne, cf. 14: 3; 15: 3; “And they sung as it were a New Song before the Throne, and before the Four Beasts, and the Elders: and no man could learn that Song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were Redeemed from the Earth”, “And they sing the Song of Moses the servant of God, and the Song of the Lamb, saying, Great and Marvelous are Thy Works, Lord God Almighty; Just and True are Thy ways, Thou King of saints”,

“they shall see His Face, cf. Rev. 22: 4; etc.; “And they shall see His Face; and His Name shall be in their foreheads.”

"(ii) It is living with Christ: ‘they did live and did Reign’, see Rev. 7: 9 ff; “After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all Nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the Throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands”; In Heaven these souls respond in a perfect manner to a Perfect Environment. And what is life but that?

"(iii) It is a sharing of Royal Glory with Christ. These souls celebrate the Lamb’s, and thus their own, Victory. With Him they Reign. All their prayers are answered; all their wishes are constantly fulfilled.

"(iv) It is ‘the First Resurrection’. The First Resurrection is the translation of the soul from this sinful Earth to God’s Holy Heaven. It is followed at Christ’s Second Coming by the Second Resurrection when the body, too, will be Glorified.

“Our final question is, who participates in this Reign? The answer is simple and easy. First of all, all the souls of the Martyrs, ‘those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus’. Secondly, all other believers who died in their faith, ‘such as worshipped not the beast’, etc.

“The rest of the dead, that is, all other men who died, the unbelieving dead, lived not until the ‘thousand years’ are finished. When that period is finished, then there is a change. Then they enter ‘the Second Death’. In other words, they receive Everlasting Punishment: not only as for their soul but now also for their body. The change is not for better but for the worse.

“On the other hand, those who have part in the First Resurrection are Blessed and Holy. Over them the Second Death has no power. Not only shall they Reign with Christ, but they shall also Worship God in Christ as priests throughout the ‘thousand years’."

https://tbc.tn-biblecollege.edu/files/tbc/resthistlib/Hendricksen-W-More_Than_Conquerors_-1940.pdf

 

[Ascetic X]

There are several repeating themes in Revelation 20. The mention of the thrones, the martyrs, Satan, Christ ruling.

The thrones, martyrs, Christ ruling, as mentioned several times earlier in Revelation, are all occurring in heaven.

Satan being cast out of heaven, making war against the saints, pursuing the woman and her children, all occur on the earth.

Revelation 20 does not say Christ reigns on the earth. That completely takes the passage out of context.

The context of Revelation 20 is the reward the martyrs receive for staying faithful in the midst of persecution… they reign with Christ for 1000 years.

Even if Satan is loosed for that time to wreck havoc upon the earth, doesn’t mean Christ is ruling on the earth for the 1000 years.

Reigning with Christ in heaven for 1,000 years makes no sense.

Revelation 20

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

 

[John of Japan]

@Alan Dale Gross
I have no desire to argue with your quotes of Chafer without your own thinking. Have a nice day.

 

[John of Japan]

(Poor JD731, he's been suckered into every word of that kind of scam artistry).

Poor Alan. All he can do is quote other people. I would that he would answer dispensationalism with his own thinking, but so far he has not.

 

[John of Japan]

I find it somewhat disingenuous to try to bring in Chafer on the side of opposition to dispensationalism. Chafer wrote a 7 volume Systematic Theology (which I have) which was premillennial and dispensational. In fact, the paper cover says, "Evangelical, Premillennial and Dispensational. "He wrote, "In the light of the obvious truth that chiliasm has produced the great missionaries, the great evangelists, and an uncounted number of honored expositors [including him! JoJ], the charge of heresy must arise either from ignorance or malice." (Vol. 4, p. 284).

 

[John of Japan]

Copy of post: Dispensationalism


This is complete baloney. No dispensational theology treats a dispensation as something to be "dispensed." That has nothing to do with either the English or the Greek.

Right and that's the same as saying, "No dispensational theology treats a dispensation as something to be "dispensed", as defined by the Bible where Paul says, “A dispensation of the Gospel is committed to me” (I Cor. 9:17); where Paul is properly using the definition of the word 'dispensation', where he means, "the Gospel had been entrusted to him to be dispensed by him."


Again, "dispensed" is baloney. No dispensational theologian holds to that: Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Ryrie, Vlach, etc. It is in fact the "etymological fallacy."

Very strangely, in his post #4 Alan seems to be claiming my statements (not italicized) as his (italicized). I'll just conclude that he doesn't know how to do quotes in the BB environment.

For the record, 1 Cor. 9:17 is never, ever translated with "dispensed." That was invented by Alan, or whoever he is currently quoting anonymously. (Note: we do not allow anonymous quotes in the research papers of our students. Every quote must be sourced. To do otherwise is plagiarism.) The KJV translates oikonomia here as "dispensation," which means "stewardship" all through the NT, but never "dispensing."

I'd better go and teach my seminary course now on "Bible Translation Theory and Practice."

 

[easternstar]

Dispensationilists should love this guy. For several years, he has forecast the rapture, only to have to extend the time, when the rapture didn't happen. Currently, he's expecting the rapture to happen this year, 2026, most likely this spring, or this coming fall:

Daniel 11: God's Master Plan ... Unsealed

A unique, simple, and logical explanation of Daniel 11, highlighting events preceding the rapture, the seals, and how everything fits together.

daniel11truth.com

 

[Ascetic X]

Dispensationilists should love this guy. For several years, he has forecast the rapture, only to have to extend the time, when the rapture didn't happen. Currently, he's expecting the rapture to happen this year, 2026, most likely this spring, or this coming fall:

Daniel 11: God's Master Plan ... Unsealed

A unique, simple, and logical explanation of Daniel 11, highlighting events preceding the rapture, the seals, and how everything fits together.

daniel11truth.com

Since when did dispensationalists love false prophets who predict when the rapture will occur?

 

[easternstar]

Since when did dispensationalists love false prophets who predict when the rapture will occur?

They loved Hal Lindsey, didn't they?

 

[Ascetic X]

They loved Hal Lindsey, didn't they?

You generalize. Some may have, many did not. Dispensationalists and all Christians who are biblically mature know that it is forbidden to predict the rapture or the end of the world. Predictions come from false teachers and cults.

 

[easternstar]

You generalize. Some may have, many did not. Dispensationalists and all Christians who are biblically mature know that it is forbidden to predict the rapture or the end of the world. Predictions come from false teachers and cults.

Apparently many did, considering his book sales.
Tim LaHaye is another one.