Has dispensationalism contributed to mistaken worldviews, or is it the truth ?

[Baptist Believer]

I am reluctant to go any further, though peace and civility has been requested it probably will not last but I hope I'm wrong - I haven't read through the entire thread yet.

I have been quite impressed with the caliber of conversation and the gentle tone of discussion. I hope this continues.

 

[Iconoclast]

Here is a radio show you can listen on the phone or the computer
it is on hyper dispensationalism...it might be helpful;



Chris Arnzen
Just now


FREE BOOK Giveaway!
"Mishandling the Word of Truth:
A Critique of HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISM"

is our topic today on
IRON SHARPENS IRON Radio
*TODAY*, SEPT.16th, 4-6pm*ET*

featuring guest author
Dr. JAMIN HUBNER,
Founding Chair of Christian Studies at John Witherspoon College

Listen *LIVE* GLOBALLY @
www.IronSharpensIronRadio.com
or ANYWHERE BY PHONE @ (401)283-6754
(press #3 when prompted for Christian Radio)

 

[Rob_BW]

As someone who reads more than he posts, I just want to say thank you for all of the posts. It has been very informative.

 

[Yeshua1]

Here is a radio show you can listen on the phone or the computer
it is on hyper dispensationalism...it might be helpful;



Chris Arnzen
Just now


FREE BOOK Giveaway!
"Mishandling the Word of Truth:
A Critique of HYPER-DISPENSATIONALISM"

is our topic today on
IRON SHARPENS IRON Radio
*TODAY*, SEPT.16th, 4-6pm*ET*

featuring guest author
Dr. JAMIN HUBNER,
Founding Chair of Christian Studies at John Witherspoon College

Listen *LIVE* GLOBALLY @
www.IronSharpensIronRadio.com
or ANYWHERE BY PHONE @ (401)283-6754
(press #3 when prompted for Christian Radio)

Also, there is New Covenant Theology, that is getting pretty close to progressive Dispy theology now, as both see the Second Coming as one event, and that there will be a Pre Mil kingdom aspect....

 

[Iconoclast]

http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/a-reply-to-john-macarthur/


John MacArthur says;

“Now all that leads us to this: if you get Israel right you will get eschatology right. If you don't get Israel right you will never get eschatology right. Never. And you'll migrate from one view to another just depending on the last book you read or the last lecture you heard . . . . If you get eschatology right it's because you get Israel right. You get Israel right when you get the Old Testament covenants and promises right. You get the Old Testament covenants and promises right when you get the interpretation of Scripture right. You get interpretation of Scripture right when you're faithful to a legitimate hermeneutic and God's integrity is upheld. Get your hermeneutics right, you'll get the Old Testament promises right. Get promises right, you'll get Israel right. Get Israel right, you'll get eschatology right. The Bible calls God the God of Israel over 200 times. The God of Israel. There are over 2,000 references to Israel in Scripture, not one of them means anything but Israel. Not one of them, including Romans 9:6 and Galatians 6:16 which is the only two passages that amillennialists go to trying to convince us that that cancels out the other 2,000. There is no difficulty in interpreting those as simply meaning Jews who were believers; the Israel of God. Israel always means Israel, never means anything but Israel. Seventy three New Testament uses of Israel always mean Israel.”

Mr. Riddlebarger responds

 

[Iconoclast]

http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/a-reply-to-john-macarthur/


John MacArthur says;

“Now all that leads us to this: if you get Israel right you will get eschatology right. If you don't get Israel right you will never get eschatology right. Never. And you'll migrate from one view to another just depending on the last book you read or the last lecture you heard . . . . If you get eschatology right it's because you get Israel right. You get Israel right when you get the Old Testament covenants and promises right. You get the Old Testament covenants and promises right when you get the interpretation of Scripture right. You get interpretation of Scripture right when you're faithful to a legitimate hermeneutic and God's integrity is upheld. Get your hermeneutics right, you'll get the Old Testament promises right. Get promises right, you'll get Israel right. Get Israel right, you'll get eschatology right. The Bible calls God the God of Israel over 200 times. The God of Israel. There are over 2,000 references to Israel in Scripture, not one of them means anything but Israel. Not one of them, including Romans 9:6 and Galatians 6:16 which is the only two passages that amillennialists go to trying to convince us that that cancels out the other 2,000. There is no difficulty in interpreting those as simply meaning Jews who were believers; the Israel of God. Israel always means Israel, never means anything but Israel. Seventy three New Testament uses of Israel always mean Israel.”

 

[Iconoclast]

I grew up as a dispensationalist and believed with every fiber of my being that God had two distinct plans for the human race. God’s primary plan centered around the salvation of national Israel and the Jewish people. This, I thought, was God’s main purpose and everything else (including the salvation of the Gentiles) was kind of a sideshow. The other plan (“plan B” as some dispensational writers spoke of it) was a temporary period (the church age) wherein God decided to deal with the Gentiles only because Israel had rejected their Messiah (Jesus) when he came to save them. In this scheme, God will continue to deal primarily with Gentiles until the time of the Rapture when God removes Gentile believers from the earth, and then returns to his original plan which is to save Israel from the antichrist and the nations of the revived Roman empire at the battle of Armageddon. I believed this with everything in me, until I read carefully Ephesians 2:11-22 and discovered that God’s purpose was to make the two peoples (Jew and Gentile) one in Christ. Paul was crystal clear–God doesn’t have two distinct redemptive plans for Jew and Gentile, rather he had one plan which included both Jew and Gentile. And the scope of that one plan is to save both people by the same savior, through the same means, which completely contradicts the dispensationalist’s notion that God has two distinct purposes for Jew and Gentile.

file:///C:/Users/Tonyd85/Downloads/The%20Household%20of%20God%20edited%205.pdf
see pt2-

 

[Iconoclast]

Because it was God’s purpose to unite Jew and Gentile, Christ’s messianic mission was universal in scope. Although Jesus came to Israel, he preached to Gentiles on occasion in fulfillment of a number of messianic prophecies such as Isaiah 49:1-7 (our Old Testament lesson) in which the prophet foretold of a time when the gospel would be preached to distant coastlands, to people who were far off as well as near, and when Israel’s Messiah would be a light to the Gentile nations. There can be no question that Paul’s sees this prophecy (as well as others like it, such as Isaiah 52:7 and 57:19) as fulfilled in Jesus’ messianic mission, and through his own office as apostle to the Gentiles. This is clear in verse 17 when Paul says of Jesus, “he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near.” Therefore, it was the purpose of God from the beginning to save his elect (Jew and Gentile) through the person and work of his son as announced in the gospel, which was to be preached to the ends of the earth. This flies directly in the face of the dispensationalist notion that God has two people with two distinct plans of redemption. There is no sense here that the church “replaces” Israel (so-called “replacement theology”). Rather, God adds a gazillion believing (and elect) Gentiles along with Jewish believers to his spiritual household. It is better to see this as expansion theology, rather than as replacement theology!It was Jesus’ purpose then to a create one new man in Christ, who, in terms of the “new man’s” standing before God, is neither Jew nor Gentile. Where there were two men before (Jew and Gentile), now only one stands, a justified sinner, at peace with God through the death of Christ. This “new man” is also at peace with all those for whom Christ has died who hail from every race and culture. When Jesus died on the cross, God made peace with us. In turn, God is no longer our judge but our friend, and we, who once were alienated from each other because of all kinds of sinful reasons (pride, racism, self-righteousness, etc.), are now to be reconciled to each other. Through the death of Jesus, God ended his hostility toward us, our hostility toward him, and our hostility toward each other.In verses 15-16, Paul is also clear that Jesus did this “by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.” Since Jesus fulfilled all righteousness in his perfect obedience to the commandments of God, the ceremonial aspects of the law (“the law of commandments in ordinances”) are no longer binding upon a Christian. Paul is not referring to the moral law (the Ten Commandments) which remains in force and binding upon a Christian (cf. Romans 3:31). Rather, Paul is here referring to the ceremonies and civil aspects of the Sinaitic covenant which have been done away with by Jesus. And if Jesus has done away with them, these things should no longer divide those whom the Father has chosen and for whom the son has died.when Paul speaks of Jesus tearing down the dividing wall in his own flesh (a reference to Jesus’ perfect obedience and suffering upon the cross), Jews would have understood his words to mean that in Jesus Christ, God totally destroyed that which formerly had divided Jew from Gentile. In the new temple (a topic which Paul is about to address) there is no longer a wall dividing Jew from Gentile, and which prevents Gentiles from full access into the inner court and the holy of holies. In the new temple of God (the church), all racial, cultural, and national barriers must pass away. “In Christ,” Jews and Gentiles are now one people, God’s household.5The coming of Jesus ended the religious division between believing Jew and Gentile. The New Testament allows for Jews to still live as Jews (in terms of culture and diet), but makes no such requirement of Gentiles. The ceremonial aspects of the law are now fulfilled by Christ. All Gentiles need do is abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and food cooked in blood (so as not to offend Jews), and abstain from sexual immorality (because the law of God requires it). No longer are God’s people to be divided along racial, ceremonial, and cultural lines. Jesus destroyed all such divisions. In fact, it was his purpose to unite believing Jew and Gentile into one–a new society, God’s household, the church. And so

 

[Iconoclast]

Looking for a physical earthly temple, in physical Jerusalem, is error now. Jesus rules as Prophet, Priest, and King now from heavenly Jerusalem and Zion.
Israel and Muslims fight for what they believe is Holy land, but all that is Holy is in heaven now as far as a holy place. Assembled local churches are to be a visible manifestation of Kingdom rule on earth.

 

[Iconoclast]

Notice too that the household of God is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets–a reference to those twelve disciples whom God has called to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, and to summon both Jew and Gentile alike to trust in the Savior proclaimed in that gospel. That Savior is none other than Jesus Christ, who is the cornerstone (that stone upon which the temple’s foundation itself is set and centered). Paul is no doubt referring to Isaiah 28:16, which declares of the coming Messiah, “therefore thus says the Lord God, `Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation: ‘Whoever believes will not be in haste.’” Not only is Jesus that one predicted by Isaiah, he is that one proclaimed to Jew and Gentile alike, who will now become living stones in that spiritual temple (the body of Jesus) built upon that very foundation which has for its cornerstone, the person and work of Christ (i.e., the gospelThere are a number of important points in the closing verses of chapter two. We Gentiles have been brought near to God through the work of Christ, so that we are no longer strangers and aliens, outside the covenant and cut-off from its blessings. No, through Jesus’ death upon the cross, we have become fellow citizens in the household of God (his church), composed of the saints (those justified by the merits of Jesus Christ). This household is the church and has no national or racial identity. God’s household is his family, and we are his adopted children. This means that we are brothers and sisters in Christ, and have a deep bond, which, in many ways transcends all other earthly bonds, even that of family (in a certain sense) as well as race, social standing, wealth (or lack thereof), education, and anything else which divides people in a fallen world. This also means that after the coming of Jesus, there is no Christian nation, or Christian culture anywhere on the earth. There is Christ’s church, and wherever that church grows and flourishes, so does that nation flourish where members of that church act as salt and light.Paul makes this point quite explicitly in verses 19-22. “So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.”

 

[HankD]

Looking for a physical earthly temple, in physical Jerusalem, is error now. Jesus rules as Prophet, Priest, and King now from heavenly Jerusalem and Zion.
Israel and Muslims fight for what they believe is Holy land, but all that is Holy is in heaven now as far as a holy place. Assembled local churches are to be a visible manifestation of Kingdom rule on earth.

Material things of God can be holy.

Many of my bibles say "The Holy Bible".


HankD

 

[Iconoclast]

What all of this means is that together with believing Jews, all those Gentiles who trust in Christ are fellow heirs, members of Christ’s body, and partakers of the same promise that God had promised to Israel. Now we see that it was God’s purpose all along to fulfill his covenant promises through the life and death of Jesus Christ. As Paul put it back in verses 13-16 of chapter 2, “But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.” All of this is found in the gospel which God called Paul to preach to the Gentiles.of the earth shall be blessed.”

Since Jesus Christ is that seed (redeemer) promised to Abraham, it is in Christ that God will now fulfill all of his covenant promises, which, as Paul now tells us, include both Jew and Gentile.

In fact, not only was this foretold in Genesis 12, Isaiah 49 (as we saw last time), but also in Isaiah 59:19 (part of our Old Testament lesson), where we read these words. “So they shall fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun; for he will come like a rushing stream, which the wind of the Lord drives.” The gospel has gone to the ends of the earth.


5In terms of Paul’s main point expressed previously in chapter two, God’s purpose was to unite Jew and Gentile into one new people. This was the mystery of which he has been speaking, a point he makes explicitly in verse 6. “This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.” Once Jesus steps out of the shadows of the Old Testament, what God had promised (although kept hidden in the background) is that now all elect Gentiles are fellow heirs with Israel and together as one people who will receive everything God has promised to his own. This is directly tied to the original promise made to Abraham under the terms of the covenant of grace way back in Genesis 12, when God promised Abraham that “in you all the families

 

[Iconoclast]

Material things of God can be holy.

Many of my bibles say "The Holy Bible".


HankD

Yes Hank that is true enough....what I meant to focus on was "The Holy Place"
There can no longer be an earthly Holy Place, since the ONCE for all time sacrifice was perfectly completed by our Lord.
No new temple, no new earthly High Priest can do anything to make or go back to what is completed.
Believers are "holy"...our assembled worship is "holy" as we are In Union with Christ.
He is the head we are the body....we gather on earth , but offer our prayer and service of worship to the heavenly Zion and Jerusalem

 

[HankD]

Yes Hank that is true enough....what I meant to focus on was "The Holy Place"
There can no longer be an earthly Holy Place, since the ONCE for all time sacrifice was perfectly completed by our Lord.
No new temple, no new earthly High Priest can do anything to make or go back to what is completed.
Believers are "holy"...our assembled worship is "holy" as we are In Union with Christ.
He is the head we are the body....we gather on earth , but offer our prayer and service of worship to the heavenly Zion and Jerusalem

OK, I agree about the holy place, yes it is in heaven but we don't know if the holy place in heaven will be brought down to the earth after it is cleansed for the millennial reign of Christ.

After all the Logos descended from heaven into the earthly womb of Mary.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

Revelation 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God

HankD

 

[Iconoclast]

Here is a group who denies this teaching;
http://graceambassadors.com/prophecy/israel/does-the-bible-teach-a-spiritual-israel

By Justin Johnson
Many people are taught that anyone who is saved becomes a member of Israel, but not the real Israel. Instead, they are taught, that we become part of a spiritual Israel. But is this Biblical? Is God finished with the Israel of the Old Testament?

The ‘spiritual Israel’ concept is created from a failure to understand the dispensational shift from God’s dealing with Israel to the body of Christ. Many who subscribe to the idea of spiritual Israel, most always teach that Israel was an allegory for the church today, often referred to as the true Israel.

 

[Iconoclast]

OK, I agree about the holy place, yes it is in heaven but we don't know if the holy place in heaven will be brought down to the earth after it is cleansed for the millennial reign of Christ.

After all the Logos descended from heaven into the earthly womb of Mary.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

Revelation 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God

HankD

Hank....why do you suggest that it comes down after the white throne judgment, but call that time, the "millennium"? That is the eternal state

 

[Iconoclast]

The true glories of what God promised cannot be seen until the coming of Christ–although when the New Testament looks back in this, we learn that Abraham “got it” because although he was promised a land in Palestine (Genesis 12:1-3), by faith he knew that the reality for the people of God (Jew or Gentile) was not found in any earthly promise, including the promised land. “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (Hebrews 11:8-10).

The point is that we could never possibly understand the promise in its fullness if we regarded the original promise in Genesis 12:1-3 as the hermeneutical key to determine how we understand such things even in the light of future (and greater) revelatory light.

Dispensationalists have this completely backwards. They say the Old Testament tells us what the promise is–a land in Palestine. Therefore, we must take this literally (even if the New Testament tells us otherwise) or else we undermine the authority of Scripture.

We say the New Testament clarifies and amplifies the Old Testament promises in light of Christ. It is not the amillennarian, but the apostle Paul who “spiritualizes” the land promise by extending the land promised to Abraham to the whole world after the coming of Christ (Romans 4:13). It is not the amillennarian, but the author of Hebrews who tells us that the promise of a land in Palestine was typological of the heavenly city which Abraham desired because he saw that the land pointed him to something even greater. Now that Christ has come, we can see why redemptive history unfolds in the manner that it does. Promise gives way to fulfillment. Types and shadows give way to biblical reality. And while we are speaking of the Old Testament, didn't Joshua himself tell us that the typological promise of the land had already been fulfilled (Joshua 21:43), leading us to expect the New Testament to universalize the land promise in light of the coming of Christ?

At this point, the critical question raised by Dr. MacArthur’s comment above is “just why did national Israel reject Jesus’ messianic kingship and thereby come under the covenant curse?”

Jesus was rejected because the kingdom he came to bring Israel was not an earthly kingdom (John 18:36; and in Romans 14:17 Paul tells us that “the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit”). Israel rejected Jesus because they were seeking a national/political kingdom tied to the land promised to Abraham and to the typological kingship of David. They were not looking for that spiritual kingdom defined in the parables of Matthew 13 which spreads into the whole world (cf. Matthew 13:32). No, they wanted to be a great nation with a king as they had been in the past, and this meant a defeat of Rome.

In other words, the Jews wanted a geo-political kingdom much like that described by the dispensationalists as characteristic of the future millennial age. Blinded by a zeal without knowledge (Romans 10:2), a trust in personal righteousness instead of that provided by God through faith (cf. Philippians 3:3-11) and because of the national embarrassment and harsh realities of Roman occupation, when Jesus didn’t offer or promise the Jews such a kingdom, they rejected him.

 

[HankD]

Hank....why do you suggest that it comes down after the white throne judgment, but call that time, the "millennium"? That is the eternal state

I think you missed my point that God is able to bring things from heaven to earth.
My fault - it was unclear - it was not to establish when.
If God desires to bring the holy place to earth from heaven during the millennium (if it exists) He is able.
If He can bring the whole city of the New Jerusalem descending out of heaven then the holy place should not be a problem.

HankD

 

[Iconoclast]

We say the New Testament clarifies and amplifies the Old Testament promises in light of Christ. It is not the amillennarian, but the apostle Paul who “spiritualizes” the land promise by extending the land promised to Abraham to the whole world after the coming of Christ (Romans 4:13).

It is not the amillennarian, but the author of Hebrews who tells us that the promise of a land in Palestine was typological of the heavenly city which Abraham desired because he saw that the land pointed him to something even greater.


Now that Christ has come, we can see why redemptive history unfolds in the manner that it does. Promise gives way to fulfillment. Types and shadows give way to biblical reality.

These are in need of some answers...

And while we are speaking of the Old Testament, didn't Joshua himself tell us that the typological promise of the land had already been fulfilled (Joshua 21:43), leading us to expect the New Testament to universalize the land promise in light of the coming of Christ?

 

[Iconoclast]

Jesus was rejected because the kingdom he came to bring Israel was not an earthly kingdom (John 18:36;

and in Romans 14:17 Paul tells us that “the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit”).


Israel rejected Jesus because they were seeking a national/political kingdom tied to the land promised to Abraham and to the typological kingship of David.

They were not looking for that spiritual kingdom defined in the parables of Matthew 13 which spreads into the whole world (cf. Matthew 13:32). No, they wanted to be a great nation with a king as they had been in the past, and this meant a defeat of Rome.