• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

John Nelson Darby and Pre-trib-dispensationalism

Status
Not open for further replies.

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This is an incorrect. Redemptively speaking, Covenant Theology views God as having one called-out people from all time. You will hear Covenant Theologians use the term "Old Testament Church" to refer to believers during the Old Covenant. The physical promises that were made to the covenant nation of Israel are separate and apart from the spiritual promises made to the seed of Abraham (on the basis of faith c.f. Romans 4). Dispensationalism sees a real separation between Israel and the Church. Dispensationalism believes that the Church did not exist prior to the inauguration of the New Covenant. Classic Dispensationalism views Israel and the Church being separated in the eternal state. Progressive Dispensationalism has attempted to distance itself from that latter view.
I won't argue the point on this thread. It is enough for one to remember that the term "replacement theology" is common when referring to covenant view.

The view that held what you are describing is more the historic pre-mil. Generally speaking they have held the Gentiles are grafted into the redeemed of Israel and that group is who will reign with Christ during the millennium.

It is also important to note that some (like Jonathan Edwards) held (imo) to a pre-mil view and covenant theology. Personally, I think he came fairly close to the correct rendering.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Many have questioned the role of John Nelson Darby in the beginning of pre-trib-dispensationalism. Dr. Thomas Ice {http://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/ttcol.html} is a current dispensational scholar who has much to say about Darby.


JOHN NELSON DARBY AND THE RAPTURE {http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Ice-JohnNelsonDarbyandth.pdf}

by Thomas Ice

Supporters of pretribulationism generally believe that John Nelson Darby (1800– 1882) revived this lost New Testament teaching through intense Bible study during convalescence from a riding accident in December 1827 and January 1828. Evangelical opponents of pretribulationism often put forth theories that cast Darby in a bad light. For example, some say Darby got it from Edward Irving (1792–1834), while others say it originated from the prophetic utterance of a fifteen-year old Scottish lassie Margaret Macdonald (1815–1840). Both sources are understood to be tainted since Irving was considered exocentric and heretical and Macdonald’s prophetic utterance is thought to be demonic. What is the evidence that Darby developed his view from his own personal study?

//snip//

A PROVIDENTIAL ACCIDENT

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

page4image30472

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

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

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

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

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

First, Darby says that he realized “the absolute, divine authority and certainty of the Word, as a divine link between us and God,”39 which caused “the scriptures to gain complete ascendancy over me.”40 Darby confirms an evangelical view of the inspiration and authority of Scripture.

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

Third, Darby understood more fully his present standing with Christ in heaven. Such a heavenly standing becomes the basis for much of Darby’s theology that sees the believer already positioned with Christ in heaven. “I was in Christ, accepted in the Beloved, and sitting in heavenly places in Him. This led me directly to the apprehension of what the true church of God was, those that were united to Christ in heaven.”43

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

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

I did not know you started your own thread on this topic.

You know lets not debate Dispensationalism, but Lordship Salvation vs. Free Grace. Which persuasion are you? I argue for LS and can cite you various passages of scripture that defend the view. Are you ready to listen?
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I did not know you started your own thread on this topic.

You know lets not debate Dispensationalism, but Lordship Salvation vs. Free Grace. Which persuasion are you? I argue for LS and can cite you various passages of scripture that defend the view. Are you ready to listen?
Start your own thread on Lordship Salvation.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
There's any number of us non-dispies that had we'd said this to a dispy would get an infraction from you, but you smooth this over for him.
Why would anyone get an infraction for anything said thus far. Quite frankly I find the OP very biased.
Though he may have quoted his "historians" accurately, it was his conclusion that he drew from those quotes that was very false. Just because his "authorities" say thus and thus, does not necessarily mean that most dispensationalists agree with it. That is the false statement made. Nor can he prove that statement.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Actually doing some research by looking at books in my library I discovered plenty of evidence for dispensationalism before Darby. Take one example in Johnathan Edwards whom in 1699 wrote a two volume book called A complete History or survey of the dispensations. Or other examples are Isaac Watts (1674-1748) and Pierre Poiret (1546-1719). There are others I could mention that predate Darby whom came around in 1800. But my reading does prove that neither Darby nor the Plymouth Brethren invented dispensationalism.

Sure the Dispensationalism system had different names in the system of Edwards than that of Darby, but even his dispensationalism system differs from that of Scofield, James Brookes and others.
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
1). You haven't addressed what is covered up.
2). Now you also need to explain what is so different between the views of Isreal, because they both exclude Isreal and replace it with the church.
3). I've got no problems with quotes as long as they can be verified as accurate.

1. They cover up their distinctives by trying to lump anyone that has any kind of division as dispensationalist. That is the only way they can date themselves pre Darby which they are so desperate to do.
2. Actually I don't because Ryrie makes it clear that how one views Israel is THE litmus test for if someone is truly a dispensationalist or not. But I will anyways. As far as Dispensationalist are concerned Israel has always and will always be distinct from the church. The church did not start until Pentecost and will continue until the rapture at which time God will go back to dealing with Israel. Where as CT see all saints both old and new making up the church, that believe make up true Israel with Gentiles being grafted into Israel and unbelieving Israel being broken off.
3 I gave the book and page information you should be able to check with that.
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Actually doing some research by looking at books in my library I discovered plenty of evidence for dispensationalism before Darby. Take one example in Johnathan Edwards whom in 1699 wrote a two volume book called A complete History or survey of the dispensations. Or other examples are Isaac Watts (1674-1748) and Pierre Poiret (1546-1719). There are others I could mention that predate Darby whom came around in 1800. But my reading does prove that neither Darby nor the Plymouth Brethren invented dispensationalism.

Sure the Dispensationalism system had different names in the system of Edwards than that of Darby, but even his dispensationalism system differs from that of Scofield, James Brookes and others.
This is False. Even my Dispensationalist Bible College acknowledge that Dispensatiolism started with Darby. As Ryrie pointed out in his book that I quoted in a previous post seeing dispensations does not a dispensationalist make.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This is False. Even my Dispensationalist Bible College acknowledge that Dispensatiolism started with Darby. As Ryrie pointed out in his book that I quoted in a previous post seeing dispensations does not a dispensationalist make.

Check the chapter on the origins of dispensationalism. It did not start with the brethren.
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Check the chapter on the origins of dispensationalism. It did not start with the brethren.
Nope Ryrie can't do it. The best he does is show that breaking the Bible into Dispensations happened before Darby. But he says "In other words, a person can believe in dispensations and even see them in relations to progressive revelation, without being a dispensationalist."

All he does in that chapter is show dispensations of different groups prior to Darby. And then gives reason for Dispensationalism recent history. He can't show that the Sine Qua Non of Dispensationalism exist before Darby, or he would have done so.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Darrell Bock (in Progressive Dispensationalism, 1993) places the rise of Dispensationalism with the nineteenth century Brethren Movement from which a host of prominent evangelical personalities emerged; Darby was one of these.
Bock denotes as has been detailed by BlessedWife, that dispensations are not distinctive to Dispensationalism, but the way Dispensationalists define the distinctives of each dispensation definitely differs. Does this definition need development? Giggle

He spends more than 40 pages relating the history and the distinctives of Dispensationalism and notes eight "...abiding concerns and emphases that characterize the dispensational tradition"

Common Features of Dispensational Theology
  • Authority of Scripture
  • Dispensations "The word dispensation refers to a particular arrangement by which God regulates the way human beings relate to Him." (p. 14)
  • Uniqueness of the Church
  • Practical Significance of the Universal Church
  • Significance of Biblical Prophecy
  • Futurist Premillennialism
  • The Imminent Return of Christ
  • A National Future for Israel
Rob
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nope Ryrie can't do it. The best he does is show that breaking the Bible into Dispensations happened before Darby. But he says "In other words, a person can believe in dispensations and even see them in relations to progressive revelation, without being a dispensationalist."

All he does in that chapter is show dispensations of different groups prior to Darby. And then gives reason for Dispensationalism recent history. He can't show that the Sine Qua Non of Dispensationalism exist before Darby, or he would have done so.

It's just not what you want to hear. Anyways why title a chapter the origins of dispensationalism and give example after example of people whom were not dispensationalists? Makes no sense.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Here is another book.

The book you asked about is Dispensationalism before Darby: Seventeenth-Century and Eighteenth-Century English Apocalypticism
 

blessedwife318

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It's just not what you want to hear. Anyways why title a chapter the origins of dispensationalism and give example after example of people whom were not dispensationalists? Makes no sense.
Then quote where he shows anyone that has the sine quo non before Darby. It doesn't exist. Even in that chapter he has to acknowledge that Dispensatiolism comes back to Darby. That is a historical fact.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Then quote where he shows anyone that has the sine quo non before Darby. It doesn't exist. Even in that chapter he has to acknowledge that Dispensatiolism comes back to Darby. That is a historical fact.

Hogwash. You are just an anti-dispensationalist and refuse to believe.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Evan: You need to observe a moratorium on your animal references. Does your wife read your posts? Do members of your church? How would you feel if some of those you have witnessed to read your entries here?
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No. Honestly no mater what I say or quote you won't believe it and still will find an excuse to claim the lie that Darby invented Dispensationalism.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
From this site
http://www.biblebelievers.com/BlueDISP.html

Some critics assume that dispensationalism is a recent doctrine invented by Dr. C. I. Scofield, editor of the famous Scofield Reference Bible, and J. N. Darby; implying that dispensationalism is a doctrine of modern times and does not have Biblical authority. However, research will show that neither C. I. Scofield or J. N. Darby are the inventors of dispensationalism or the final authority on the subject.

From the first century, writers believed in different economies or administrations. Bible instructor Larry V. Crutchfield, of Baumholder, West Germany, has written an article titled Ages and Dispensations Of The Ante-Nicene Fathers. In it he points out that the Fathers of early church history believed in divisions of history based on God's dealings with man. He states, "Among those whose doctrine of ages and dispensations has survived from the Ante-Nicene period are Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and to a minor degree Victorinus of Petau."

Crutchfield says that "Barnabas' year-day tradition is the earliest budding of the dispensational understanding of God's dealings with man."

Justin Martyr (AD 100-165): according to Crutchfield, Justin believed in four phases of human history in God's program. The first was from Adam to Abraham; the second was from Abraham to Moses; the third was from Moses to Christ; and the fourth was from Christ to the eternal state.

Irenaeus (AD 120-202): The dispensational scheme of Irenaeus is four in number. They are: 1. From the Creation to the Flood. 2. From the Flood to the Law. 3. From the Law to the Gospel. 4. From the Gospel to the Eternal State. He taught that there were four zones of the world and of mankind. He saw a connection between these zones, the faces of the "four living creatures", the four gospels and the four dispensations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top