I'm not sure why you object to the idea that a theology can develop or change in 100 years. All theologies do. If that is a "sweeping generalization," it is a correct one.
-
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!
What is Dispensationalism?
- Thread starter John of Japan
- Start date
- Status
No, Scofield was not hyper. The hyper dispensationalists follow either E. W. Bullinger, who started a new dispensation after Acts, or John O'Hair and Cornelius Stam. One example of their faulty teaching is that they believe baptism is not for this dispensation.
The Bullingerites have largely faded away, but the other crowd is alive and well, with a fellowship of "Bible churches" and a Bible college, Grace Bible College (formerly Milwaukee Bible College) in Wyoming, Michigan. They have a headquarters in the next town over from us, and a church in our town. I've interacted with one of their members who is, nevertheless, zealous for the Lord.
The progressives are a compromise with covenant theology. Their view was launched with a 1993 book by Craig Blaising and Darrell Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism. They have 3 or 5 dispensations (depending on where you read in the book) which do not correspond to Scofield's and Ryrie's seven.
Unbelieving Israel & unbelieving Gentiles & the Church are indeed separate entities. However at the preaching of the Gospel many thousands of Jews/Israelites formed the Church & the Jewish Christians were guided into opening full membership of uncircumcised Gentiles into the Church. True, believing Israel & the Church are one body without a dividing wall. Scripture makes that very clear. Both OC & NC prophecy starting with Gen. 12. In Luke 2 Gabriel & Simeon give an inclusive message.
The fact that Israel's national leaders maintained a position of opposition to their Messiah & the Apostles & the Church cannot mean that wicked men frustrate God's prophecy. They perished according to Jesus' prophecy.
This is all true, and I agree, but it is not exactly replacement theology, which teaches that all of Israel's promises and prophecies are fulfilled by the church.
A few years ago I visited one of those churches. In Wisconsin...
The sunday school was a premillienial presentation which I sat through and listened without comment.
The two elders invited me to stay for lunch where I discovered one of the elders was exploring other end time positions,where the one man..Pastor Miller was solidly premillenial. He wound up giving me two books by Cornelius Stam and kept sending me newsletters for two years after.
he was trying to stop my drifting from those teachings...small world...The main pastor enjoyed me questioning Pastor Miller.
Grace Baptist Sun Prarie Wisconsin
Thanks for the update on these two groups.
Last edited:
prophecy70
Active Member
I don't believe the church replaced israel. But if grafted into the remnant of Israel that is the elect
No mass conversation at the end of time. No resort to animal sacrifices. They receive salvation the same as us. Through Grace through Jesus.
prophecy70
Active Member
What promises to Israel have not been fulfilled?
prophecy70
Active Member
Many people of the Reformation thought this including Martin Luther did they not?
Did they skip that part?
Hyperdispensationalism;
Beware of Hyper Dispensationalism
The “Issue” –
A person can easily be identified as a hyper by their unorthodox view of when the body of Christ began. In fact, this is “the issue.”[4]
Stam states their position:
We believe, and are sure, however, that the present dispensation began, not with Peter and the eleven at Pentecost, but with Paul, to whom the risen, glorified Lord later reveled His will and program for our day. [5]
Ryrie correctly notes that most “Dispensationalists say that the church began at Pentecost, while ultra dispensationalists believe that it began with Paul sometime later.”[6] Whether or not they hold to the “Acts 28” view (Bullinger), or the Acts 18 view (O’Hair) or the so-named “mid Acts” view (Acts 9 – Stam and Sadler) makes no difference. They all add an extra dispensation between Acts 2 and Paul. This is done to eliminate water baptism. [Bullinger, and his followers also did away with communion since they only held Paul’s prison epistles (of which 1 Cor. 11 is not included) as doctrine for the Church Age.]
Ironside, in his classic pamphlet Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, categorizes the errors of hypers who took Bullinger’s position:
1. The “four gospels are entirely Jewish.”[7]
2. The church in the book of Acts “is simply an aspect of the kingdom and is not the same as the Body of Christ.”[8]
3. Only Paul’s prison epistles are Church Age material. “Paul did not receive his special revelation of the mystery of the body until his imprisonment in Rome.”[9]
4. “The entire book of Revelation has to do with the coming age and has no reference to the Church today.”[10]
[Note: The fact that some of the doctrinal verses in Rev. 1-3 teach a person can lose his salvation imposes at least a primary application to the Tribulation, with a historical and devotional relevance to the Church Age. See: Rev. 4:1- “things which must be hereafter.”]
5. The bride of Jesus Christ is NOT the body of Christ, but “Jewish.”[11]
6. “The Christian ordinances . . . Have no real connection with the present economy.”[12]
Ruckman outlines the teachings of hyper-dispensationalism as follows:
1. There is a period of time called “THE GRACE OF GOD” which began in Acts 9 (Stam, Baker, Moore, Watkins) or in Acts 18 (O’Hare and others) or in Acts 28 (Bullinger . . .
2. Water baptism is not for “THIS AGE” since “THIS AGE” began in Acts 9 or Acts 13 or Acts 18 or Acts 28.
3. Bible-believing Baptists are heretics who do not follow PAULINE teaching (1 Ti. 1:16).
4. Since Paul did not COMMAND anyone to be baptized, it is UNSCRIPTURAL.
5. Since Paul was not “SENT TO BAPTIZE,” water baptism is PRE-PAULINE (1 Cor. 1).
6. The “ONE BAPTISM” of Ephesians 4 automatically cancels water baptism .[13]
Beware of Hyper Dispensationalism
The “Issue” –
A person can easily be identified as a hyper by their unorthodox view of when the body of Christ began. In fact, this is “the issue.”[4]
Stam states their position:
We believe, and are sure, however, that the present dispensation began, not with Peter and the eleven at Pentecost, but with Paul, to whom the risen, glorified Lord later reveled His will and program for our day. [5]
Ryrie correctly notes that most “Dispensationalists say that the church began at Pentecost, while ultra dispensationalists believe that it began with Paul sometime later.”[6] Whether or not they hold to the “Acts 28” view (Bullinger), or the Acts 18 view (O’Hair) or the so-named “mid Acts” view (Acts 9 – Stam and Sadler) makes no difference. They all add an extra dispensation between Acts 2 and Paul. This is done to eliminate water baptism. [Bullinger, and his followers also did away with communion since they only held Paul’s prison epistles (of which 1 Cor. 11 is not included) as doctrine for the Church Age.]
Ironside, in his classic pamphlet Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, categorizes the errors of hypers who took Bullinger’s position:
1. The “four gospels are entirely Jewish.”[7]
2. The church in the book of Acts “is simply an aspect of the kingdom and is not the same as the Body of Christ.”[8]
3. Only Paul’s prison epistles are Church Age material. “Paul did not receive his special revelation of the mystery of the body until his imprisonment in Rome.”[9]
4. “The entire book of Revelation has to do with the coming age and has no reference to the Church today.”[10]
[Note: The fact that some of the doctrinal verses in Rev. 1-3 teach a person can lose his salvation imposes at least a primary application to the Tribulation, with a historical and devotional relevance to the Church Age. See: Rev. 4:1- “things which must be hereafter.”]
5. The bride of Jesus Christ is NOT the body of Christ, but “Jewish.”[11]
6. “The Christian ordinances . . . Have no real connection with the present economy.”[12]
Ruckman outlines the teachings of hyper-dispensationalism as follows:
1. There is a period of time called “THE GRACE OF GOD” which began in Acts 9 (Stam, Baker, Moore, Watkins) or in Acts 18 (O’Hare and others) or in Acts 28 (Bullinger . . .
2. Water baptism is not for “THIS AGE” since “THIS AGE” began in Acts 9 or Acts 13 or Acts 18 or Acts 28.
3. Bible-believing Baptists are heretics who do not follow PAULINE teaching (1 Ti. 1:16).
4. Since Paul did not COMMAND anyone to be baptized, it is UNSCRIPTURAL.
5. Since Paul was not “SENT TO BAPTIZE,” water baptism is PRE-PAULINE (1 Cor. 1).
6. The “ONE BAPTISM” of Ephesians 4 automatically cancels water baptism .[13]
Last edited:
Sorry - should I have posted "replacement theology?"
I'm glad that you agree with my understanding. The Apostles make it very clear that the OC Scriptures were fulfilled by Jesus & the formation of the Church which at first comprised only Israelites from every nation under heaven. These would have included the dispersed tribes.
Zechariah prophesies that after the Shepherd is struck, 8 And it shall come to pass in all the land,”
Says the Lord,
“That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die,
But one–third shall be left in it:
9 I will bring the one–third through the fire,
Will refine them as silver is refined,
And test them as gold is tested.
They will call on My name,
And I will answer them.
I will say, ‘This is My people’;
And each one will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’”
One third of the Israelites will be delivered from the AD 70 tribulation - believing Israel will continue as prophesied also in Rev. 7, concerning the 144,000. These already are members of the Church, along with already dispersed believing Israelites & believing Gentiles. “That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die,
But one–third shall be left in it:
9 I will bring the one–third through the fire,
Will refine them as silver is refined,
And test them as gold is tested.
They will call on My name,
And I will answer them.
I will say, ‘This is My people’;
And each one will say, ‘The Lord is my God.’”
Israelites & Jews are of course welcomed by the Gospel - there is NO ongoing rejection of Jews as "Christ killers." No justification for persecution. They are needy sinners who are welcomed by the Gospel of their Saviour God.
As you agree, this is not replacement theology. Nor is it antisemitism. The Church continues as one redeemed people of God practising spiritual worship with none of the trappings of OC worship. At Jesus' return, the NH&NE will be the blessed eternal home of all the redeemed. All to the glory of God.
There is just no place in Scripture prophecy for a very imperfect millennial dispensation, centred on earthly Jerusalem, with a temple & animal sacrifices for sin.
Whether there will be a Jewish revival before Jesus returns is in God's hands. I don't see it in NC prophecy, nor do I see any significance in the return to the land.
Out on visitation on the Saturday before the very day I was going to teach what's wrong with hyper-dispensationalism, I ran across one of their guys, who gave me some of their literature. So I was able to directly reference their material in my lecture. I believe that to be providential.
No, the reformers concentrated on soteriology and ecclesiology, and pretty much ignored prophecy. They had a literal hermeneutic, and would have come out as chiliasts had they thought to study prophecy. Supersessionism only came later in reformed theology.Many people of the Reformation thought this including Martin Luther did they not?
Did they skip that part?
Luther had his anti-Semite moments, but did not teach prophecy to my knowledge.
Oh, wow, there are so many I don't have time to even get started. The main one is the promise of a king to sit on David's throne. That would be King Jesus. You guys can spiritualize that all you want, but the promise of a king for David's throne occurs many times in the OT, and I believe it will glorify Jesus when Israel sees that happen in the millennium.
The allegorical argument: "Well, Jesus is now sitting on the throne of David in Heaven." Absolutely ridiculous.
Well of course they are saved through grace through Jesus. That's exactly what normative dispensationalism teaches. There are no other plans of salvation in any dispensation, only by grace through faith in the coming or already come Jesus Christ.
Thanks for bringing this up. This is exactly the kind of misinformation I hoped to counter with this thread.
And now you have taught replacement theology and now I disagree. Don't include me among those who think there is no more future for God's chosen people Israel.
In revised dispensationalism ala Charles Ryrie, there are seven dispensations. This follows Scofield, though with some different emphases. There have been other schemes down through the years, such as that of Clarence Larkin (the chart guy), but seven is the standard nowadays.
The second dispensation is conscience. God's dispensation, His task for mankind, was to live a righteous life according to their consciences. They completely and miserably failed, with mankind becoming completely immoral so that God ended that dispensation with the flood of Noah.
The second dispensation is conscience. God's dispensation, His task for mankind, was to live a righteous life according to their consciences. They completely and miserably failed, with mankind becoming completely immoral so that God ended that dispensation with the flood of Noah.
prophecy70
Active Member
And Jesus sitting on an earthy throne of David in this millennium where people burn sacrifices again denies Jesus of what he has done.
Where do you get that Jesus is sitting on "Davids throne" in the millennium?
That is absolutely ridiculous.
prophecy70
Active Member
I misspoken on the who, it wasn't the reformers but the earlier
Melito of Sardis
"The people [Israel] was precious before the church arose, and the law was marvelous before the gospel was elucidated. But when the church arose and the gospel took precedence, the model was made void, conceding its power to the reality…The people [Israel] was made void when the church arose."
Ignatius of Antioch
"those who partake of the Passover are partakers with those who killed Jesus"
Justin Martyr
" the Church is "true spiritual Israel"
Cyprian of Carthage
"I have endeavored to show that the Jews…departed from God and lost God’s favor… while the Christians succeeded to their place, deserving well of the Lord by faith, and coming out of all nations and from the whole world."
Origen of Alexandria
"We say with confidence that they [the Jews] will never be restored to their former condition. For they committed a crime of the most unhallowed kind, in conspiring against the Savior of the human race… It accordingly behoved that city where Jesus underwent these sufferings to perish utterly, and the Jewish nation to be overthrown, and the invitation of happiness offered them by God to pass to others — the Christians…"
I am not saying I agree or disagree with anything they say, Im saying if things are so plain to you, why are they not to MANY other people that disagree.
So in the millennium, Jesus is not going to rule outside an enlarged Israel as laid out in Joshua 1:4 and/or 1 Kings 4:21. That is the maximum extent of David's rule, so if the Lord Jesus is going to sit on David's throne, that's all He's going to rule, right?
- Status