Dispensationalism

[prophecynut]

OldRegular
Those who argue that there is no prophecy of the Church in the Old Testament should read:

There are several OT prophecies of the Church, one of them is Isa. 65:13-15.

The Church is never mentioned as a present reality in the OT, therefore, it did not exist in the OT.

 

[prophecynut]

OldRegular

Those who are in Christ's body make up the Church, they are "born again" (John 3:3,7; 1 Pet. 1:23) and God's Spirit lives in them (Rm. 8:9,11; 1 Cor. 3:16).

Locate Scripture stating OT saints are:

1. Taken into Christ's body of believers.
2. Are born again.
3. Indwelled with the Holy Spirit.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Lewis Sperry Chafer writes: “In fact, hitherto unrevealed purpose of God in the outcalling of a heavenly people from Jews and Gentiles is so divergent with respect to the divine purpose toward Israel, which purpose preceded it and will yet follow it, that the term parenthetical, commonly employed to describe the new age-purpose, is inacurate. A parenthetical portion sustains some direct or indirect relation to that which goes before or that which follows; but the present age-purpose is not thus related and therefore is more properly termed an intercalculation.” [Systematic Theology, 4:41]

John F Walvoord writes: “the evidence if interpreted literally leads inevitably to the parenthesis doctrine.” [Millennial Kingdom, 230]

J Dwight Pentecost writes: “The church is manifestly an interruption of God’s program for Israel.” [Things to Come, 201]

Charles C. Ryrie writes: “The Church age is not seen in God’s program for Israel. It is an intercalculation.” [Basis of Premillennial Faith, 136]

By contrast, God writes (Dispensation in the NT, KJV1769 version):

1 Corinthians 9:17 (KJV1769):
For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward:
but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel
is committed unto me.

Ephesians 1:10 (KJV1769):
That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might
gather together in one all things in Christ, both
which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

Ephesians 3:2 (KJV1769):
If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God
which is given me to you-ward:

Colossians 1:25 (KJV1769):
Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation
of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

'Dispensation' is no more or less then what God says it is.

Outline of dispensations:
1. gospel
2. fulness of times
3. grace of God
4. God

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by prophecynut:
OldRegular

Those who are in Christ's body make up the Church, they are "born again" (John 3:3,7; 1 Pet. 1:23) and God's Spirit lives in them (Rm. 8:9,11; 1 Cor. 3:16).

Locate Scripture stating OT saints are:

1. Taken into Christ's body of believers.
2. Are born again.
3. Indwelled with the Holy Spirit.

Recalling the words of Jesus Christ to Nicodemus you are saying that there were no people saved in the Old Testament.

John 3:3-7
3. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?
5. Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

I don't recall that Jesus Christ put any time limitations on this teaching.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by prophecynut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> OldRegular
Those who argue that there is no prophecy of the Church in the Old Testament should read:

There are several OT prophecies of the Church, one of them is Isa. 65:13-15.
</font>[/QUOTE]I agree. However, dispensational doctrine states that there is no prophecy regarding the Church in the Old Testament.

 

[prophecynut]

Beginning with Pentecost those baptized with the Holy Spirit become members of Christ's body of which He is the head. Locate OT Scripture stating the same for the Hebrews.

John 3:5
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit , he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

"Water" is the Spirit of Christ, see 4:13-14 and Rm. 8:9. Jesus was not physically alive in the OT to die for their sins, it would be impossible for them to be born of the Spirit of Christ. In the OT his redemptive work was still future. Please locate OT Scripture stating OT saints are born again of water and of the Spirit.

Again I ask, where are OT saints indwelled with the Holy Spirit?

Dispensational doctrine is incorrect as to no OT prophecies regarding the Church. The fact that all OT Scriptures relating to the Church are prophecies affirms that it belongs to a different dispensation. Fulfillment of these prophecies are occurring during the Church Age that began at Pentecost and ends with the Rapture, not during the gospels or the Tribulation.

The "assembly" in the OT was made up of only Hebrews, the Church is composed of Jews and Gentiles. There are too many differences between the OT assembly and the Church to include them in the same dispensation.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Prophecynut: //Dispensational doctrine is incorrect as to no OT prophecies regarding the Church. The fact that all OT Scriptures relating to the Church are prophecies affirms that it belongs to a different dispensation. Fulfillment of these prophecies are occurring during the Church Age that began at Pentecost and ends with the Rapture, not during the gospels or the Tribulation.//

Amen, Brother Prophecynut -- Preach it!

Some people get confused.
There is not one homogenious
'dispensational doctrine'. There are many dispensational doctrines
just as there are many flavors of Baptists. So one who says,
"dispensational doctrine says ..." to be correct should
say, "some dispensational doctrine says ...".

 

[Pastor Larry]

God did cause the rejection of Jesus Christ by most Jewish leaders as confirmed by Jesus Christ in Matthew 13 and the Apostle Paul in Acts 28 but apparently the premier dispensationalist theologians? are unable to understand that so they describe the Church as follows:

Lewis Sperry Chafer writes: “In fact, hitherto unrevealed purpose of God in the outcalling of a heavenly people from Jews and Gentiles is so divergent with respect to the divine purpose toward Israel, which purpose preceded it and will yet follow it, that the term parenthetical, commonly employed to describe the new age-purpose, is inacurate. A parenthetical portion sustains some direct or indirect relation to that which goes before or that which follows; but the present age-purpose is not thus related and therefore is more properly termed an intercalculation.” [Systematic Theology, 4:41]

John F Walvoord writes: “the evidence if interpreted literally leads inevitably to the parenthesis doctrine.” [Millennial Kingdom, 230]

J Dwight Pentecost writes: “The church is manifestly an interruption of God’s program for Israel.” [Things to Come, 201]

Charles C. Ryrie writes: “The Church age is not seen in God’s program for Israel. It is an intercalculation.” [Basis of Premillennial Faith, 136]

And your point? What you assert is not borne out by these quotations. A parenthesis does not have to a change in plans or unanticipated.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by prophecynut:
Beginning with Pentecost those baptized with the Holy Spirit become members of Christ's body of which He is the head. Locate OT Scripture stating the same for the Hebrews.

John 3:5
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit , he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

"Water" is the Spirit of Christ, see 4:13-14 and Rm. 8:9. Jesus was not physically alive in the OT to die for their sins, it would be impossible for them to be born of the Spirit of Christ. In the OT his redemptive work was still future. Please locate OT Scripture stating OT saints are born again of water and of the Spirit.

How were people in the Old Testament saved? I suggest that you read John 4:13, 14 and Romans 8:9 again.

Originally posted by prophecynut:
Again I ask, where are OT saints indwelled with the Holy Spirit?

Dispensational doctrine is incorrect as to no OT prophecies regarding the Church. The fact that all OT Scriptures relating to the Church are prophecies affirms that it belongs to a different dispensation. Fulfillment of these prophecies are occurring during the Church Age that began at Pentecost and ends with the Rapture, not during the gospels or the Tribulation.

You mean none the Old Testament prophecies concerning Jesus Christ and the Church were fulfilled in the Gospels. What did he tell the two disciples on the road to Emmaus:

Luke 24:25-27
25. Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27. And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

What Scripture was Jesus Christ expounding?

Originally posted by prophecynut:
The "assembly" in the OT was made up of only Hebrews, the Church is composed of Jews and Gentiles. There are too many differences between the OT assembly and the Church to include them in the same dispensation.

Was Job a Hebrew, were the Ninevites Hebrews, were they saved? What about all the people before the Flood, were they all lost?

I have never said there weren't dispensations. There were two, that of the Old Testament, the dispensation that looked forward to the fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 and related prophecies concerning Jesus Christ; and that of the New Testament, the dispensation after the fulfillment of those prophecies.

You must understand what dispensation means. It is a translation of the Greek word oikonomia and appears 7 times in the New Testament it is translated [KJV] dispensation 4 times and stewardship 3 times. The word means:

1) the management of a household or of household affairs
1a) specifically, the management, oversight, administration, of other's property
1b) the office of a manager or overseer, stewardship
1c) administration, dispensation

The word dispensation does not occur at all in the Old Testament.

 

[prophecynut]

OldRegular

Locate Scripture stating OT saints are:

1. Taken into Christ's body of believers.
2. Are born again.
3. Indwelled with the Holy Spirit.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by prophecynut:
OldRegular

Locate Scripture stating OT saints are:

1. Taken into Christ's body of believers.
2. Are born again.
3. Indwelled with the Holy Spirit.

After you tell me how people were saved in the Old testament and before the Death of Jesus Christ.

 

[billwald]

"J Dwight Pentecost writes: “The church is manifestly an interruption of God’s program for Israel.” [Things to Come, 201]"

Doesn't compute. On the other hand, the Mosiac Covenant was an interruption. All the people who came out of Egypt were to be priests. God changed the program after the gold cow incident.

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
The issue there, Monergist, is the consistent use of it. Allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture would never lead to covenantalism, apart from teh presupposition of covenantalism. "Literal grammatical historical interpretation" means you treat langauge normally, as the author intended. There are certainly symbolic, or figurative passages of Scripture. DT recognizes this. What DT avoids is assigning a symbolic or figurative interpretation to a passage that is clearly not to be taken that way. And that is where CT so often fails ... They take plainly literal passages and make them figurative in order to fit it into their system.

Very well put Pastor. So you believe this....well now

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by Monergist:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
The issue there, Monergist, is the consistent use of it. Allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture would never lead to covenantalism, apart from teh presupposition of covenantalism. "Literal grammatical historical interpretation" means you treat langauge normally, as the author intended. There are certainly symbolic, or figurative passages of Scripture. DT recognizes this. What DT avoids is assigning a symbolic or figurative interpretation to a passage that is clearly not to be taken that way. And that is where CT so often fails ... They take plainly literal passages and make them figurative in order to fit it into their system.

This is where I see CT's and Dispensationalist talking past each other. You say "Allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture would never lead to covenantalism, apart from teh presupposition of covenantalism" and someone holding to CT could also say Quite honestly, I started out studying Dispensationalism far more thoroughly than CT, and I never could get it. And I can't see why these 'truths,' if they come from the simple study of scripture itself, remained hidden for 1800 years.

I don't hate Dispensationalism. Some of its teachers I have great respect for. And I've seen enough of your posts in the past here to know that you have high regard for scripture. I respect that in anyone, even when I disagree.

But what I do hate are muddled arguments that confuse the issues. Which arguments of this type do. </font>[/QUOTE]You didn't start out studying correctly my friend or you would have never left it. When the truth of Gods Word talks, you listen.

"Allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture would never lead to Dispensationalism, apart from the presupposition of Dispensationalism.

I believe just the opposite. If you could take a brand new believer and get him to prayerfully study, unfiltered by anyones doctrine, he would eventually see God's word correctly. Or, God would reveal His Word rightly.

 

[hillclimber]

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by hillclimber:
If you could take a brand new believer and get him to prayerfully study, unfiltered by anyones doctrine, he would eventually see God's word correctly.

I cannot think of any books written before 1800 which address dispensationalism, can you?

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by Chemnitz:
Dispensationalism has many flaws, here are just a few.

1. Dispensationalism teaches that the Messiah and His kingdom
promised in the Old Testament are essentially political in nature. In this respect it
takes a position which resembles the Messianic expectation of first-century
Judaism. Christ's atoning work on the cross is not central in God's plan according
to this view. Rather, He is wrongly perceived as , coming to set up a this-worldly
kingdom, and when rejected, as postponing it.

Christ's atoning work is central to all of His saints. He did come and they (Israel) recieved Him not. He returned to heaven. He is sitting at the right hand of the Father, ready to return in judgement.

2. The view regards the Messianic age as only a future reality. It tends to
exchange the "now" for a "not yet," thereby depriving people of the comforting
promises of the Gospel in the present. In truth, Christ inaugurated the kingdom of
heaven at His first advent, a kingdom which is now ours by faith even while it is
yet hidden under the cross until its consummation at Christ's second advent.

Utter nonsense. Please point out any evidences for a/the Kingdom today.

3. Dispensational premillennialism tends to regard the glory of God as the center
of theology, rather than the mercy of God revealed, and yet hidden, in the
suffering and death of Jesus on the cross for the sins of the world. The visible
manifestations of God's power at the end of history and obedience to the will of
God become the primary foci, instead of the grace of God revealed in the cross not at all
of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 2:2)--which by faith the Christian regards and accepts as
the place of God's definitive triumph over sin and every evil (in Lutheran
theology, the "theology of the cross" as opposed to a "theology of glory").

That's a mischaracterisation of dispensationalism.

4. Dispensational premillennialism underestimates, and even ignores, the
significance of Biblical typology. All prophecy points to Jesus Christ as the
fulfillment. He is the antitype of the Old Testament types. When the reality to
which the Old Testament points does come, one cannot revert back to the
"shadows," such as the Old Testament temple (Col. 2:16-17; Heb. 10:1).

typology doesn't effect or wipe out theology. The mystery was hid in Christ and was revealed through Paul.


5. The compartmentalization of Scripture into distinct dispensations seriously
overlooks the Law/Gospel unity of the Old and New Testaments. For example, it
makes a radical distinction between the Mosaic "law" period and the church age
of "grace." The relationship between the Old and New Testaments is that of
promise and fulfillment, not one of distinct dispensations.

Yes it does...To His glory and our benefit.

6. Ultimately, the eschatology of dispensationalism offers a dangerously false
hope. The views of a pre-tribulation or mid- tribulation rapture offer the Christian
the false hope of exemption from the intensified persecution toward the end.
Moreover, they offer a second chance of conversion for those who are left after
the rapture. The focus of the Scripture's hope is not an earthly kingdom lasting
1000 years but eternity with Christ.

There is certainly nothing wrong with looking hopefully forward to the pretribulation rapture, in light of the scriptural evidence declaring it.

The focus of scripture is Christ, from "in the beginning" to "do not add or detract." It is always about Christ.

7. The dispensationalist view of a radical break between Israel and the church
contradicts the Scriptural teaching that the cross of Christ has eliminated forever
the distinction between Jew and Gentile (Gal. 3:28; Eph. 2:11-22; Rom. 2:25-29).

On the contrary, the Jew and Gentile are one together. All are in Christ or out of Christ today. No other distinctions.

8. The dispensational hermeneutic of consistent literalism is contrary to the
Scripturally --derived principles of interpretation (cf. section one above).

Uh. OK I guess

9. Dispensationalism's multiple resurrections and judgments are contrary to the
clear Scriptural teaching on eschatology (cf. section two above).

I don't know multiple reserrections but this really hasn't much meaning.

10. The assurance and hope of salvation tend to be grounded on an
interpretation of the signs of the times rather than on the sure Word of promise
imparted in the means of grace.

That's just silly.

-CTCR "End Times" [/QB]

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by gb93433:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by hillclimber:
If you could take a brand new believer and get him to prayerfully study, unfiltered by anyones doctrine, he would eventually see God's word correctly.

I cannot think of any books written before 1800 which address dispensationalism, can you? </font>[/QUOTE]No I cannot, but I'm not a history buff. I was even unaware of Darby and his work before coming on this board.

But I still conclude that the dispensational view would prevail in an unencumbered (by preconceptions) study. Pauls message was all but forgotten by the end of his own life.

 

[ascund]

Greetings

DT did not exist as a developed system in the early Church. Some early theologians did recognize some of the biblical principles.

Clement of Alexandria recognized four dispensations.

Augustine noted that God employed several distinct ways of working in the world as He executes His plan for history.

The first person on record to develop a genuine system was Pierre Poiret (1687).

Isaac Watts wrote "The Harmony of all the Religions which God ever Prescribed to Men and all his Dispensations towards them."

Darby (19th century), Scofield (early 20th century), and Ryrie (1970's) were significant developers of DT.

We come up to speed on God's Word very slowly.
Lloyd

 

[Ed Edwards]

Chemnitz on Dispensational flaws:
//6. Ultimately, the eschatology of dispensationalism offers a dangerously false
hope. The views of a pre-tribulation or mid- tribulation rapture offer the Christian
the false hope of exemption from the intensified persecution toward the end.
...//

A dispensationalist said (and I agree):
//There is certainly nothing wrong with looking hopefully forward to
the pretribulation rapture, in light of the scriptural evidence declaring it.
The focus of scripture is Christ, from "in the beginning" to
"do not add or detract." It is always about Christ.//

I'd like to talk about 'false' hope. This reason for doubting the
dispensationalist's teaching is assuming the conclusion, a logical flaw
that can produce untruth. I get the accusation " a dangerously false
doctrine" on another matter: Once Saved, Always Saved (OSAS).
It is a dangerous doctrine because someone will use it as an occasion
to sin. So? if people misuse God's Holy Written Word, are we to
disbelieve it?

Romans 3:3 (KJV1769 Edition):
For what if some did not believe?
shall their Unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

Strangely, it is the a-mill/post-tribs i find believing that
pre-mill/pretrib and OSAS are both wrong.
I beleive in OSAS. If post-trib is right, I think God is big enough to cover
those who bend under torture.
Those who beleive not in OSAS and believe post-trib have
God throwing 200 Million Christians to the wolves to be devoured
by them. For what purpose. I sure don't know. All i know
is that 999,997 of a million people will sign any document, deny any
principle a mean person wants them to - after 72-hours of torture
(many before). The other three die. God knows this and puts men
to the test? No purpose for that.

But no, most post-tribs and a-tribs who are anti-OSAS
must believe that God isn't big
enough to provide John 3-16 'eternal life'.

Chemnitz on Dispensational flaws:
//6....
Moreover, they offer a second chance of conversion for those who are left after
the rapture. ... //

This statement is probably incorrect.
The Messanic Jews (a Jew who believes Jesus is the Messiah) i've talked
to (three of them) agree that there will be NO GENTILE saved in the
Tribulation period. They say it by saying: "When the last Gentile that is
going to be saved is saved then the pretribulation rapture of the church
will take place." I think in the Tribulation period a gentile can be
saved, but none will take advantage of it. BTW, you note this totally
blows the idea of many pretribbers of the noble gentiles who miss the
pretribulation rapture, believe in Jesus afterwards, and go around tricking
the the Antichrist and his lackys -- the stuff that makes millions
of dollars but is built on 100% HOT AIR.


Chemnitz on Dispensational flaws:
//6. ... The focus of the Scripture's hope is not an earthly kingdom lasting
1000 years but eternity with Christ.//

There is a difference between 'hope' and 'belief' (check out 1 Cor. 13:13).
A correct statement is: The focus of the Scripture's BELIEF
is not an earthly kingdom lasting
1000 years but eternity with Christ. To this I say a hardy AMEN.
Buy i Hope i get to be in the pretriblarion rapture. (I've been around
people who die, dying is way overrated by most folks.)


Chemnitz on Dispensational flaws:
//7. The dispensationalist view of a radical break between Israel and the church
contradicts the Scriptural teaching that the cross of Christ has eliminated forever
the distinction between Jew and Gentile (Gal. 3:28; Eph. 2:11-22; Rom. 2:25-29).//

On the contrary, the Jew and Gentile are one together in the current age.
God knows the end from the beginning and speaks of that which will be as
already being. God is never bound by His creature: time.

Chemnitz on Dispensational flaws:
//8. The dispensational hermeneutic of consistent literalism is contrary to the
Scripturally --derived principles of interpretation (cf. section one above).//

Maybe True, but not moot.

Chemnitz on Dispensational flaws:
//9. Dispensationalism's multiple resurrections and judgments are contrary to the
clear Scriptural teaching on eschatology (cf. section two above).//

Strange that the eschatology I get out of the Bible is clear about the
multiple general resurrections and multiple general judgements.
BTW, i'm always malined by
anti-dispensatinalists that i got my stuff from Darby or from someone
who got their material from Darby. Sorry folks,
i got my eschatology from the Bible. Does anybody beside me find it
strange that anti-dispensationalits argue with Darby, Schofield, etc
and WON'T TALK TO ME? Who are they kidding?

Chemnitz on Dispensational flaws:
//10. The assurance and hope of salvation tend to be grounded on an
interpretation of the signs of the times rather than on the sure Word of promise
imparted in the means of grace.//

I have no idea what this means, if anything.
Maybe it means that everybody has to figure out for themselves
which dispensation they are in. I'll give you a clue:
we are in the Gentile Age dispenstion until the pretribulation
rapture happens. Then we are in the Tribulation period.