It is very possible that because of the error they followed using this system to look at at scripture is what led to wrong views of the place of the law in the life of a Chrsitian, and so wrong views on sanctification....I think Ryrie falls here,
-
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
- Thread starter OldRegular
- Start date
- Status
Some have been shown over and again in this thread there is a difference between notating 'dispensations of times' and the system of Dispensationalism. Mentioning of the former does not make one of the latter.
Those who have been shown the above need only say these words: 'I am WRONG' and then move along with their lives.
This is incorrect. Looking at the system by Darby and that of others featured in the Ryrie book that I have there are various similarities. I would call their systems earlier systems of dispensationalism. This is perhaps why some have written entire books documenting dispensationalism before Darby.
The only thing I would agree with you is the law issue. Yes antimionism is prevalent in dispensationalism churches.
Some have rebuked me for using the 10 commandments in evangelism for they say we are in a dispensation of grace.
Four pages of arguing about nothing.
Carry on.
Carry on.
In the OP, OR quotes Ice:
The OP then proceeds to quote snippets from here and there and weaves together a rather biased history of Darby’s past making a mockery of his biblical knowledge.
Perhaps the real motive to attach origin of dispensationalism to Darby is simply because Darby is so easy for them to become an object of ridicule and mockery. The disdain that they have for this man, and thus the doctrine shows no bounds. Attack the man and one attacks the doctrine, or so they think. But Dispensationalism has been around much longer than Thomas Ice, whom he quotes first, says. And his first statement is a blatant lie which neither he nor OR, or any other non-dispensationalist can prove.
“Supporters of pretribulationism generally believe that J.N. Darby revived this lost NT teaching…” Nonsense! How are you going to prove that statement? Has anyone done a survey to find out? The enemies of Dispensationalism would like to believe that but the dispensationalists themselves would never believe such nonsense.
Concerning “systems,” Isaac Watts had his own fully developed dispensational theological system of thought. It didn’t agree with Darby. Many believe that in outline at least Scofield may have taken his material from Watts, and not Darby, for his was closer in the actual dispensations.
Thus dispensationalism and dispensational system of thoughts were around long before Darby. It simply wasn’t the “Darby Dispensationalism” that preceded Darby, for obvious reasons. Those against dispensationalism are not ready yet to concede the point that dispensationalism as a system of thought or theology was indeed around before Darby, and Darby can in no way be attributed as its founder.
It is about being truthful more than doctrine.
Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
Shockingly ITL, yet again, in keeping step with the flesh, rushes in to offer nothing but snide commentary. One wonders how this can be a daily practice of any professing person, and if this is bothersome whatsoever to ones 'walk'.
As to what evangelist said he is correct, dispensationalism tends to go hand in hand with free grace theological teachings therefore the antinomianism bleeds through.
As to what evangelist said he is correct, dispensationalism tends to go hand in hand with free grace theological teachings therefore the antinomianism bleeds through.
Dispensationalism as a fully developed system started with Darby, but the concepts and components started way before Darby so it would be incorrect for others to assume that Darby created dispensationalism because he did not. All he did was systematize concepts found way before his time.
No its not. Its about being argumentative and ignorant of church history to make the kind of claims you have made about dispensationalism.
Sure he did. So did Watts who lived before him, and so did Scofield and others who lived after him. He wasn't the be-all and end-all of dispensationalism.
Hmm, and yet Monday at 1:44 AM you made a post saying if you only knew Church History you could use that knowledge in your arguments. LOL!
Not "whom" my little friend, it's who.
"One wonders?" Why don't you just come out and say it?
"I, Internet Theologian, being one of the Elect, have the ability to judge other people's quality of discipleship, faithfulness, testimony, even their very salvation."
Oh, by the way, if something has happened "yet again", indicating a repetitious nature to the event, by definition it cannot be described as being "shocking."
Thomas Ice is a Dispensationalist, that he is one of the current leaders within dispensationalism, and as far from an anti-dispensationist as one can get.
Charles Ryrie whom I've been quoting is also a dispensationalist. His book Dispensatiolism is designed to be a defense of Dispensationalism.
OR and I have been letting current leaders within the movement speak for themselves selves about the origins, and defining characteristic.
I have already shown that Watts could not be considered a dispensationalist as he fails to meet Ryrie's test but I can always dig up that post again if I need to.
Until OR or Icon tried to tell me who T. Ice was, I had never heard of him, and I still haven't read anything more than is posted on this board by him. You say they are "current leaders" of the movement. You may or may not be right; I don't know. It doesn't matter to me. I never learned anything about dispensationalism through those men. They don't matter to me, neither do their opinions. There are thousands of Christians who believe in dispensationalism who are very likely the same--never heard of Ice or never read Ryrie. Why do you assume that these men should be the self-proclaimed current leaders? Because they write books? Many have written books. Information on this topic is all over the place.
The sources used by OR in the OP were chosen by OR, and the passages he chose to represent Dispensationalism were obviously biased.
Let's see:
Dispensationalism is demonic.
Dispensationalism came from visions caused by a fall from a horse.
His take on the history of dispensationalism:
And with other such quotes he portrays dispensationalism. Is that a fair way to portray a doctrine like this?
I know a good way how to portray Calvinism by relating it to its founder!
I will say that Dispensationalist as a whole are big on what the Bible says and I can appreciate that. They do have have a high view of Scripture which I think we could all do well to emulate. That is something I will always carry with me from my Dispensationalist days.
I remember when my then fiancé and I were talking about this I said that Dispensatiolism is a frame that I use to understand the Bible, but the important thing is to let the Bible change the frame as needed, not the frame change the Bible. I think that this is the error that can happen in any theological system if we hold to tight to them.
Now for me the big thing that changed my frame was Rom. 9-11, as I could not be faithful to the Word and faithful to the frame I was taught at the same time, so the Word won. Yes there was also some other things, like DC on here taking Dispensatiolism to its extreme logical conclusion and trying to push me there as well. So in the end Ironically it was the high view of Scripture taught to me by Dispensatiolism and another Dispensationalist that ended up pushing me out side of that very framework and into another.
You people are not discussing the elephant in the room, you are arguing about who brought it in the room, and when.
Thomas Ice is the founder and President of the Pre Trib research center. He works with Tim Lahaye, of the Left Behind series fame.
Charles Ryrie is the author of Dispensatiolism Today and obviously a huge part of the Ryrie Study Bible.
Others leaders from the past:
Dwight Pentecost author of Things to Come
John Walvoord former president of Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS), wrote many comprehensive books of Bible Prophecy
Lewis Sperry Chafer founder and President of DTS also wrote a systemic theology
CI Scofield author of the notes in the Scofield Study Bible, distribution Darby's idea to the masses with his Bible.
These guys quote each other and references each other. They are the leaders because there books are the ones sold, they are the ones quoted and references in articles and they are the author's that college students will read at Dispensationalist Schools. Of course DTS is the premier school of Dispensatiolism so the President there is going to be a leader in the movement.
Charles Ryrie is the author of Dispensatiolism Today and obviously a huge part of the Ryrie Study Bible.
Others leaders from the past:
Dwight Pentecost author of Things to Come
John Walvoord former president of Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS), wrote many comprehensive books of Bible Prophecy
Lewis Sperry Chafer founder and President of DTS also wrote a systemic theology
CI Scofield author of the notes in the Scofield Study Bible, distribution Darby's idea to the masses with his Bible.
These guys quote each other and references each other. They are the leaders because there books are the ones sold, they are the ones quoted and references in articles and they are the author's that college students will read at Dispensationalist Schools. Of course DTS is the premier school of Dispensatiolism so the President there is going to be a leader in the movement.
What many people in this thread seem to have over looked is that Darby was a rank heretic. Not because of his dispensationalism, but because of his rejection of the vicarious purpose of Christ's obedience as well as imputed righteousness.
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a contemporary of Darby, published criticism of Darby and Brethrenism in June 1869 in an article entitled "Mr. Grant on "The Darby Brethren" (Sword and Trowel.)
James Grant wrote: "With the deadly heresies entertained and taught by the Plymouth Brethren, in relation to some of the most momentous of all the doctrines of the gospel, and to which I have adverted at some length, I feel assured that my readers will not be surprised at any other views, however unscriptual and pernicious they may be, which the Darbyites have embraced and zealously seek to propagate" (Grant, James, 1875, The Plymouth Brethren: Their History and Heresies. London: William Macintosh. p. 60.)
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a contemporary of Darby, published criticism of Darby and Brethrenism in June 1869 in an article entitled "Mr. Grant on "The Darby Brethren" (Sword and Trowel.)
James Grant wrote: "With the deadly heresies entertained and taught by the Plymouth Brethren, in relation to some of the most momentous of all the doctrines of the gospel, and to which I have adverted at some length, I feel assured that my readers will not be surprised at any other views, however unscriptual and pernicious they may be, which the Darbyites have embraced and zealously seek to propagate" (Grant, James, 1875, The Plymouth Brethren: Their History and Heresies. London: William Macintosh. p. 60.)
- Status