Featured DISPENSATIONALISM

Displays used to believe that God saved people differently throughout human history

that aspect has been debunked

it has always been repentance and faith

see Hebrews 11, the life of Abraham, the Psalms (Trust in the Lord), the prophets (return to me - repentance)

Jesus said “except ye repent ye perish”

 

sigh what disputes believed that and exactly what did they believe?

 

Yes, I believe that a Christian may believe in the Dispensation doctrine and still go to Heaven. We are able to go to Heaven based on placing our faith in Christ Jesus. I don't see this as an "essential" doctrine of the faith. The Dispensation doctrine is just another viewpoint that we can debate until the cows come home, but it doesn't affect our salvation. In that aspect, no different from having different views on the End Times, the present day use of the Gifts of the Spirit, or other "secondary" doctrines.

 

The term and as translated has been is part of a false gospel. If not, then why is that term vacant from the gospel as taught in John's account? Its Biblical necessity is expressed in Mark 1:15, ". . . repent ye, and believe the gospel.". Why is it necessary prior to the gospel?

The English origin:
repent | Origin and meaning of repent by Online Etymology Dictionary

 

Biblical dispensationalism. What and as the word of God refers to it.

 

Yes, it is not an essential doctrine. Incomplete understanding of the things of God will not keep us from our Lord.

peace to you

 

I know I'm going to Heaven.
What is it that makes you think that dispensations prevents anyone from being saved?
MB

 

That dies not affect ones salvation, as Sotierology depends upon how one views Jesus and the Cross and resurrection!

 

I chose "other", as I see pieces of both "dispensationalism" and "covenant theology" when I study God's word for myself.

The way I understand "dispensationalism", it is a systematic framework ( or overview ) that someone many years ago ( John Nelson Darby, I think ) came up with to teach others what he thought the word of God taught...
To me, they are one man's opinions that were picked up and further developed by others, which seems to be a pattern with Bible teaching throughout history.

On a side note:
I had a Scofield Bible once with all the notes, and even though I thought it was a big deal to own one at the time that I bought it, I ended up ignoring those same notes later on in favor of just reading the Scriptures for myself with no "helps";
I can't seem to find it anymore, so I guess it wasn't all that important for me to keep it, and the Bible I currently study from has no study notes of any kind.

I also cannot seem to remember much of what I was taught from my former pastors about it many years ago now, nor do I agree with everything that is described here:
Dispensationalism - Wikipedia

Personally I think that dispensationalism gets some things right, and others wrong.

For example, I agree with "progressive revelation" for the most part,
And while I agree that there will be a 1,000 year reign of Christ at Jerusalem, I do not believe in a 7 year Tribulation period ( I see a 42 month, or 3.5 year period ), nor do I believe in a 2-part "rapture" of the church that takes place right before the 70th week of Daniel, and Him coming again at the end.
Rather, I see Him coming with those who have already passed on and a catching away of all of God's living elect after the Tribulation, and right before He takes over ruling the nations for that 1,000 years.



With the above in mind,
I'll answer the question Salty has posed below:

That's a tough question, but I'll answer it as honestly as I can, even though it may offend some here.

I do not believe that dispensationalism, as a system, is entirely biblical...
I also hold that one can believe, for an indeterminate amount of time, just about anything... and still be one of God's elect.


May God bless you.

 

The short answer is - yes. I am not a Dispensationalist and do not believe it has any impact on my standing in Christ.

 

I voted "somewhat". There is a fairly wide spectrum of beliefs that fall under the umbrella of Dispensationalism, so I hesitate to define my beliefs by a term that is so wide.

I agree that dispensationalism is not an essential doctrine. I believe that people are saved that believe it and also people that do not believe it.

 

I voted "Other" because it is clear from Scripture that there are several distinct "ages" (aka "dispensations") in Scripture - Eden, Fall to Flood, Flood to Call of Abram, Patriarchs to Egypt, Joseph to Moses, Exodus to Settlement, Judges to Kings, Kings to Babylon, Priests and Prophets to John (Baptist), Jesus - Baptism/Anointing to Death & Ascension, Gospel Age, Pentecost to AD 70 Destruction, Pentecost to Second coming and general resurrection, Eternal New Heaven & New Earth.

As the writers of the Letters make clear, salvation was always a living relation of the repentant believer by Faith in every dispensation. (e.g. Heb. 11)

When Dispensationalism becomes a system for the interpretation of OT Prophecy it can become a dangerous error, in that it focuses on the carnal nation of Israel rather than Christ and his Church - the Church comprising Jews and Gentiles as one redeemed people of God.

This has resulted in recognising the present carnal nation calling itself "Israel" and the people calling themselves "Jews" being recognised as the fulfilment of Prophecy, and Zionist Christian support for their occupation of what was the "Promised Land" and military displacement of the Palestinians.

 

Jesus is the fulfilment of Prophecy - see John 17 and hear his great cry from the cross - "FINISHED!"

Magnifying carnal "Israel" and the people calling themselves "Jews" as the fulfilment of Prophecy, rather than Christ and the Gospel which is simply for repentance and faith in Jesus, expressed by baptism, godly living and love for God and neighbour.

 

-Somewhat. There are aspects of both Dispensationalism and CT that don't sit right with me. I read Gentry and Wellum's 'Kingdom through Covenant' recently and felt their particular middle ground proposal made a lot of sense.

-I believe it is a non-essential issue to a person's salvation. A lot of Christians probably haven't even given it serious thought.

 

Thank you very much. That is the most comprehensive explanation of Dispensationalism that I've ever read. Like the author stated, I was also a Dispensationalist without knowing it because I didn't know any better, and did not know there were any other views.

 

It seems that Calvinist attribute a lot to Darby. Paul wrote;
;
Eph_1:10 in regard to the dispensation of the fulness of the times, to bring into one the whole in the Christ, both the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth—in him;

There are many dispensations in scriptures It wasn't John Darby who thought it up. Calvinist also claim Darby thought up freewill. They both came from scripture.
MB

 

A repentance precedes faith in the Gospel, per Mark 1:15.

 

The way Paul used the words/phrases concerning “dispensation” or “age” is not the same way modern “dispensationalist” use them.

For example, in Ephesians Paul states that the union of Jews and Gentiles into “one new man” by the cross of Christ will demonstrate Christ’s grace “in the ages to come”.

This truth clearly demonstrates the union of Jew and Gentile into “one new man” is a permanent condition. It will never change. The “age” of grace will never end.

This truth destroys the dispensationalism belief of a separate future for Israel and the Church and that the “age of grace” will end.

So, even though the “words” used in scripture may be the same used by dispensationalist, the dispensationalist lays a meaning on those words that are foreign to what the writers of scripture intended.

peace to you