-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
U
Isaiah 32 seems to be pretty key in the eschatology views.
I got this from theologicalstudies.org :
Foundational Features of Dispensationalism
1. Hermeneutical approach that stresses a literal fulfillment of Old Testament promises to Israel Though the issue of "literal interpretation" is heavily debated today, many dispensationalists claim that consistent literal interpretation applied to all areas of the Bible, including Old Testament promises to Israel, is a distinguishing mark of dispensationalism. Dispensationalists usually argue that the progress of revelation, including New Testament revelation, does not cancel Old Testament promises made with national Israel. Although there is internal debate concerning how much the church is related to the Old Testament covenants and promises, dispensationalists believe national Israel will see the literal fulfillment of the promises made with her in the Old Testament.
2. Belief that the unconditional, eternal covenants made with national Israel (Abrahamic, Davidic, and New) must be fulfilled literally with national Israel Although the church may participate in or partially fulfill the biblical covenants, they do not take over the covenants to the exclusion of national Israel. Physical and spiritual promises to Israel must be fulfilled with Israel.
3. Distinct future for national Israel "Only Dispensationalism clearly sees a distinctive future for ethnic Israel as a nation."5 This future includes a restoration of the nation with a distinct identity and function.
4. The church is distinct from Israel The church does not replace or continue Israel, and is never referred to as Israel. According to dispensationalists, the church did not exist in the Old Testament and did not begin until the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2). Old Testament promises to Israel, then, cannot be entirely fulfilled with the church. Evidences often used by dispensationalists to show that the church is distinct from Israel include: (a) Jesus viewed the church as future in Matthew 16:18; (b) an essential element of the church—Spirit baptism—did not begin until the Day of Pentecost (compare 1 Cor. 12:13 with Acts 2); (c) Christ became Head of the church as a result of His resurrection (compare Eph. 4:15; Col. 1:18 with Eph. 1:19-23); (d) the spiritual gifts associated with the church (cf. Eph. 4:7-12; 1 Cor. 12:11-13) were not given until the ascension of Christ; (e) the "new man" nature of the church (cf. Eph. 2:15) shows that the church is a NT organism and not something incorporated into Israel; (f) the foundation of the church is Jesus Christ and the New Testament apostles and prophets (cf. Eph. 2:20); (g) the author, Luke, keeps Israel and the church distinct. On this last point, Fruchtenbaum states, "In the book of Acts, both Israel and the church exist simultaneously. The term Israel is used twenty times and ekklesia (church) nineteen times, yet the two groups are always kept distinct."6
5. Multiple senses of "seed of Abraham" According to Feinberg, the designation "seed of Abraham" is used in different ways in Scripture. First it is used in reference to ethnic, biological Jews (cf. Romans 9—11). Second, it is used in a political sense. Third, it is used in a spiritual sense to refer to people, whether Jew or Gentile, who are spiritually related to God by faith (cf. Romans 4:11-12; Galatians 3:7). Feinberg argues that the spiritual sense of the title does not take over the physical sense to such an extent that the physical seed of Abraham is no longer related to the biblical covenants.
6. Philosophy of history that emphasizes both the spiritual and physical aspects of God's covenants According to John Feinberg, "nondispensational treatments of the nature of the covenants and of Israel's future invariably emphasize soteriological and spiritual issues, whereas dispensational treatments emphasize both the spiritual/soteriological and the social, economic, and political aspects of things." 7
Other significant, although not necessarily exclusive features of dispensationalism, include: (1) the authority of Scripture; (2) belief in dispensations; (3) emphasis on Bible prophecy; (4) futuristic premillennialism; (5) pretribulationism; and (6) a view of imminency that sees Christ's return as an "any-moment" possibility.
I got this from theologicalstudies.org :
Foundational Features of Dispensationalism
1. Hermeneutical approach that stresses a literal fulfillment of Old Testament promises to Israel Though the issue of "literal interpretation" is heavily debated today, many dispensationalists claim that consistent literal interpretation applied to all areas of the Bible, including Old Testament promises to Israel, is a distinguishing mark of dispensationalism. Dispensationalists usually argue that the progress of revelation, including New Testament revelation, does not cancel Old Testament promises made with national Israel. Although there is internal debate concerning how much the church is related to the Old Testament covenants and promises, dispensationalists believe national Israel will see the literal fulfillment of the promises made with her in the Old Testament.
2. Belief that the unconditional, eternal covenants made with national Israel (Abrahamic, Davidic, and New) must be fulfilled literally with national Israel Although the church may participate in or partially fulfill the biblical covenants, they do not take over the covenants to the exclusion of national Israel. Physical and spiritual promises to Israel must be fulfilled with Israel.
3. Distinct future for national Israel "Only Dispensationalism clearly sees a distinctive future for ethnic Israel as a nation."5 This future includes a restoration of the nation with a distinct identity and function.
4. The church is distinct from Israel The church does not replace or continue Israel, and is never referred to as Israel. According to dispensationalists, the church did not exist in the Old Testament and did not begin until the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2). Old Testament promises to Israel, then, cannot be entirely fulfilled with the church. Evidences often used by dispensationalists to show that the church is distinct from Israel include: (a) Jesus viewed the church as future in Matthew 16:18; (b) an essential element of the church—Spirit baptism—did not begin until the Day of Pentecost (compare 1 Cor. 12:13 with Acts 2); (c) Christ became Head of the church as a result of His resurrection (compare Eph. 4:15; Col. 1:18 with Eph. 1:19-23); (d) the spiritual gifts associated with the church (cf. Eph. 4:7-12; 1 Cor. 12:11-13) were not given until the ascension of Christ; (e) the "new man" nature of the church (cf. Eph. 2:15) shows that the church is a NT organism and not something incorporated into Israel; (f) the foundation of the church is Jesus Christ and the New Testament apostles and prophets (cf. Eph. 2:20); (g) the author, Luke, keeps Israel and the church distinct. On this last point, Fruchtenbaum states, "In the book of Acts, both Israel and the church exist simultaneously. The term Israel is used twenty times and ekklesia (church) nineteen times, yet the two groups are always kept distinct."6
5. Multiple senses of "seed of Abraham" According to Feinberg, the designation "seed of Abraham" is used in different ways in Scripture. First it is used in reference to ethnic, biological Jews (cf. Romans 9—11). Second, it is used in a political sense. Third, it is used in a spiritual sense to refer to people, whether Jew or Gentile, who are spiritually related to God by faith (cf. Romans 4:11-12; Galatians 3:7). Feinberg argues that the spiritual sense of the title does not take over the physical sense to such an extent that the physical seed of Abraham is no longer related to the biblical covenants.
6. Philosophy of history that emphasizes both the spiritual and physical aspects of God's covenants According to John Feinberg, "nondispensational treatments of the nature of the covenants and of Israel's future invariably emphasize soteriological and spiritual issues, whereas dispensational treatments emphasize both the spiritual/soteriological and the social, economic, and political aspects of things." 7
Other significant, although not necessarily exclusive features of dispensationalism, include: (1) the authority of Scripture; (2) belief in dispensations; (3) emphasis on Bible prophecy; (4) futuristic premillennialism; (5) pretribulationism; and (6) a view of imminency that sees Christ's return as an "any-moment" possibility.
U
this next section called "Progressive Dispensationalism" seems to be much closer to what I read in the Bible:
3. Progressive Dispensationalism (1986—present) What does "progressive" mean? The title "progressive dispensationalism" refers to the "progressive" relationship of the successive dispensations to one another.12 Charles Ryrie notes that, "The adjective 'progressive' refers to a central tenet that the Abrahamic, Davidic, and new covenants are being progressively fulfilled today (as well as having fulfillments in the millennial kingdom)." 13
"One of the striking differences between progressive and earlier dispensationalists, is that progressives do not view the church as an anthropological category in the same class as terms like Israel, Gentile Nations, Jews, and Gentile people. The church is neither a separate race of humanity (in contrast to Jews and Gentiles) nor a competing nation alongside Israel and Gentile nations. . . . The church is precisely redeemed humanity itself (both Jews and Gentiles) as it exists in this dispensation prior to the coming of Christ."14
Progressive dispensationalists see more continuity between Israel and the church than the other two variations within dispensationalism. They stress that both Israel and the church compose the "people of God" and both are related to the blessings of the New Covenant. This spiritual equality, however, does not mean that there are not functional distinctions between the groups. Progressive dispensationalists do not equate the church as Israel in this age and they still see a future distinct identity and function for ethnic Israel in the coming millennial kingdom. Progressive dispensationalists like Blaising and Bock see an already/not yet aspect to the Davidic reign of Christ, seeing the Davidic reign as being inaugurated during the present church age. The full fulfillment of this reign awaits Israel in the millennium.
Key theologians : Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L. Bock, and Robert L. Saucy
3. Progressive Dispensationalism (1986—present) What does "progressive" mean? The title "progressive dispensationalism" refers to the "progressive" relationship of the successive dispensations to one another.12 Charles Ryrie notes that, "The adjective 'progressive' refers to a central tenet that the Abrahamic, Davidic, and new covenants are being progressively fulfilled today (as well as having fulfillments in the millennial kingdom)." 13
"One of the striking differences between progressive and earlier dispensationalists, is that progressives do not view the church as an anthropological category in the same class as terms like Israel, Gentile Nations, Jews, and Gentile people. The church is neither a separate race of humanity (in contrast to Jews and Gentiles) nor a competing nation alongside Israel and Gentile nations. . . . The church is precisely redeemed humanity itself (both Jews and Gentiles) as it exists in this dispensation prior to the coming of Christ."14
Progressive dispensationalists see more continuity between Israel and the church than the other two variations within dispensationalism. They stress that both Israel and the church compose the "people of God" and both are related to the blessings of the New Covenant. This spiritual equality, however, does not mean that there are not functional distinctions between the groups. Progressive dispensationalists do not equate the church as Israel in this age and they still see a future distinct identity and function for ethnic Israel in the coming millennial kingdom. Progressive dispensationalists like Blaising and Bock see an already/not yet aspect to the Davidic reign of Christ, seeing the Davidic reign as being inaugurated during the present church age. The full fulfillment of this reign awaits Israel in the millennium.
Key theologians : Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L. Bock, and Robert L. Saucy
Last edited by a moderator:
Point #2 I believe is pivotal and much confusion arises here. The word 'must' is a little misleading for all the physical promises made to physical Israel MUST be honored (this is true); but unless the physical descendents of Abraham-Isaac-Jacob take hold of the unseen promises (e.g. eternal life) through their Messiah Yeshua the word MUST is not true but rather WON'T.
Many dispensationslists are falsely accused of teaching eternal life to the Jews even though they end up refusing Yeshua as Savior.
Many dispensationslists are falsely accused of teaching eternal life to the Jews even though they end up refusing Yeshua as Savior.
L
I still haven't figured out where Dispensationalism really splits off from Covenant Theology, on a Scriptural basis. I would like to find a side by side comparison with verses to back everything up.
It seems clear to me that God's main purpose throughout all history was, is, and always will be Christ. Israel was, is, and will be a tool to glorify Christ. When I talk to Dispensationalists, I get the vibe that they have these two items switched.
It seems clear to me that God's main purpose throughout all history was, is, and always will be Christ. Israel was, is, and will be a tool to glorify Christ. When I talk to Dispensationalists, I get the vibe that they have these two items switched.
I think the biggest split Scripturally primarily has to do with OT propecies. All of the blessings promised to ethnic Israel beginning with the Abrahamic covenant of a land which they've never fully possessed, an earthly kingdom promise to King David which has never been literally fulfilled, to the incredible prosperity promised in Isaiah and Zechariah to Israel, economic, national, political, military and spiritual prosperity. The Covenant theologian says all these promises are fulfilled by a spiritual blessing, a redemptive plan of God. The Dispensationalist says all these promises still have a literal fulfillment, while not denying the redemptive spiritual blessings which are a part of the plan, but in God's larger plan of bringing glory to Himself He will culminate His plan with an earthly, physical, economic, military and spiritual reign here on earth. A culmination of history.
Picking up Fruchtenbaum's (a great example of a Messianic Jew ) point in #5 we see in the Book of Acts a diminishing of the expectant Kingdom on earth,centered in Jerusalem to extend to the Gentiles while simultaneously seeing the birth and growth of the Church the Body of Christ expressed in terms of the eternal purpose of God...I.e. One New Man in Christ where there is neither Jew nor Gentile.
but...these promises are recorded internally, by God Himself as having been fulfilled.
what does the DSPL (= dispensational believer/theologian per: LT's idea) do with these?
here are a few examples:
Hosea 11:1
1When Israel was a youth I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son. 2The more they called them, The more they went from them; They kept sacrificing to the Baals And burning incense to idols
Matthew 2:15
where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son."
Numbers 9:12
They must not leave any of it till morning or break any of its bones. When they celebrate the Passover, they must follow all the regulations.
Psalm 34:20
he protects all his bones, not one of them will be broken.
John 19:7
For these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, "NOT A BONE OF HIM SHALL BE BROKEN."
Psalm 22:18
They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment.
John 19:24
"Let's not tear it," they said to one another. "Let's decide by lot who will get it." This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled that said, "They divided my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment." So this is what the soldiers did.
Psalm 41:9
Even my close friend, someone I trusted, one who shared my bread, has turned against me.
John 13
I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen. But the Scripture will be fulfilled, ‘He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.’
Jeremiah 31:15
This is what the LORD says: "A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more."
Matthew 2
16Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men. 17Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah:
18 “A voice was heard in Ramah,
weeping and loud lamentation,
Rachel weeping for her children;
she refused to be comforted, because they are no more.”
~
if we look at the address, say for Jeremiah...he's way up in chapter 31....speaking of things fufilled in Christ.
there are so many more.
maybe it would be useful to make a thread just for this purpose.
it may clear up a lot of the futurist assertions that most prophecies are not fulfilled, when in reality - most are.
i'll do it tomorrow, Lord Willing.
what does the DSPL (= dispensational believer/theologian per: LT's idea) do with these?
here are a few examples:
Hosea 11:1
1When Israel was a youth I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son. 2The more they called them, The more they went from them; They kept sacrificing to the Baals And burning incense to idols
Matthew 2:15
where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son."
Numbers 9:12
They must not leave any of it till morning or break any of its bones. When they celebrate the Passover, they must follow all the regulations.
Psalm 34:20
he protects all his bones, not one of them will be broken.
John 19:7
For these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, "NOT A BONE OF HIM SHALL BE BROKEN."
Psalm 22:18
They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment.
John 19:24
"Let's not tear it," they said to one another. "Let's decide by lot who will get it." This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled that said, "They divided my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment." So this is what the soldiers did.
Psalm 41:9
Even my close friend, someone I trusted, one who shared my bread, has turned against me.
John 13
I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen. But the Scripture will be fulfilled, ‘He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.’
Jeremiah 31:15
This is what the LORD says: "A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more."
Matthew 2
16Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men. 17Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah:
18 “A voice was heard in Ramah,
weeping and loud lamentation,
Rachel weeping for her children;
she refused to be comforted, because they are no more.”
~
if we look at the address, say for Jeremiah...he's way up in chapter 31....speaking of things fufilled in Christ.
there are so many more.
maybe it would be useful to make a thread just for this purpose.
it may clear up a lot of the futurist assertions that most prophecies are not fulfilled, when in reality - most are.
i'll do it tomorrow, Lord Willing.
"with an earthly, physical, economic, military and spiritual reign here on earth. A culmination of history"
where are we told this is God's Greater Plan?
could you please use scripture to address the questions?
eventually our opinions mean little if we don't see it confirmed in God's Word.
don't you agree?
where are we told this is God's Greater Plan?
could you please use scripture to address the questions?
eventually our opinions mean little if we don't see it confirmed in God's Word.
don't you agree?
does DPSL see Israel receiving the Covenant Curses, as well as the Promises? or do they skip over 70AD?
i am aware that DSPL says God still owes people Land...they talk about it; describe it...but do not document it from scripture:
LAND PROMISES SUPPOSEDLY NOT FULFILLED BY FAITHFUL GOD:
"God unconditionally promised Abraham's descendants a literal world-wide kingdom over which they would rule through their Messiah who would reign upon King David's throne...Even the animals and reptiles will lose their ferocity and no longer be carnivorous," (The Late Great Planet Earth, Hal Lindsay, p 165)
"The nature of the blessings are earthly, territorial, and national, and have nothing to do with a spiritual church to which none of these blessings has been promised ...Christ is not now on the throne of David bringing blessings to Israel as the prophets predicted, but He is rather on His Father's throne waiting for the coming earthly kingdom and interceding for His own who form the church," (The Millennial Kingdom: A Basic Text in Premillennial Theology, John F. Walvoord, p 205, 1983 AD)
"The foundation of the state of Israel in recent years has been a part of the predicted regathering of scattered Israel back to their ancient land...The present partial possession of the land is a token. The complete possession awaits the coming of Israel's Redeemer" (The Millennial Kingdom: A Basic Text in Premillennial Theology, John F. Walvoord, p 185, 1983 AD)
.....
BUT THE BIBLE SAYS - the Three Promises to Abraham were fulfilled BY FAITHFUL GOD:
Israel possessed all the land God promises to Israel through Abraham.
- God said that if/when Israel got all the land promised, then they would have six cities of refuge.
Deuteronomy 19:7-9
"Therefore, I command you, saying, 'You shall set aside three cities for yourself.' "If the LORD your God enlarges your territory, just as He has sworn to your fathers, and gives you all the land which He promised to give your fathers— if you carefully observe all this commandment which I command you today, to love the LORD your God, and to walk in His ways always—then you shall add three more cities for yourself, besides these three. "
Joshua 20:7-9 lists six cities of refuge - Kadesh, Shechem, Hebron, Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan.
Israel got all the land promised Abraham - can DSPL really read these chapters and deny it? how, i do not know.
Joshua 21:43-45
"So the LORD gave Israel all the land which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they possessed it and lived in it. And the LORD gave them rest on every side, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers, and no one of all their enemies stood before them; the LORD gave all their enemies into their hand. Not one of the good promises which the LORD had made to the house of Israel failed; all came to pass. "
Joshua 23:14-15
"Now behold, today I am going the way of all the earth, and you know in all your hearts and in all your souls that not one word of all the good words which the LORD your God spoke concerning you has failed; all have been fulfilled for you, not one of them has failed. "It shall come about that just as all the good words which the LORD your God spoke to you have come upon you, so the LORD will bring upon you all the threats, until He has destroyed you from off this good land which the LORD your God has given you."
Joshua 24:28
Then Joshua dismissed the people, each to his inheritance.
2 Samuel 8:3
David defeated Hadadezer...as he went to restore his rule at the River [Euphrates].
1 Kings 4:21
Now Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the [Euphrates] River to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt; they brought tribute and served Solomon
2 Chronicles 9:26
And he was the ruler over all the kings from the Euphrates River even to the land of the Philistines, and as far as the border of Egypt.
Nehemiah 9:8
And Thou didst find Abraham's heart faithful before Thee, and didst make a covenant with him to give him the land of the Canaanite, of the Hittite and the Amorite, of the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite-- to give it to his descendants. And Thou hast fulfilled Thy promise, for Thou art righteous.
Jeremiah 11:5
"in order to confirm the oath which I swore to your forefathers, to give them a land flowing with milk and honey, as it is this day." Then I answered and said, "Amen, O LORD."
......
THE PROMISE OF A GREAT NATION FULFILLED BY FAITHFUL GOD - physically and spiritually:
physically:
Genesis 46:3
And He said, "I am God, the God of your father; do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for I will make you a great nation there.
Deuteronomy 1:10
'The LORD your God has multiplied you, and behold, you are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude.
Deuteronomy 10:22
"Your fathers went down to Egypt seventy persons in all, and now the Lord has made you as numerous as the stars of heaven.
Hebrews 11:11-12
since she considered Him faithful who had promised; therefore, also, there was born of one man, and him as good as dead at that, as many descendants as the stars of heaven in number, and innumerable as the sand which is by the seashore.
spiritually:
Romans 4:16-17
For this reason it is by faith, that it might be in accordance with grace, in order that the promise may be certain to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, "A father of many nations have I made you"
Galatians 3:29
if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.
Galatians 4:28
And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise
confirmation of both...in the NT:
Acts 7:17
But as the time of the promise was approaching which God had assured to Abraham, the people increased and multiplied in Egypt
Acts 13:19
And when He had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He distributed their land as an inheritance-- all of which took about four hundred and fifty years.
Romans 4:13
It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith.
to the exclusion of national Israel - WHO SAYS THIS? i mean seriously.
will you folks EVER document who says this?
it's crazy....Jews gave us the Bible.
we all know jews who converted to Christ.
like.....really. is this really the best you can do?
it's just so tiresome.
and it's slanderous and lying. NO ONE SAYS THIS.
to the exclusion of national Israel - WHO SAYS THIS?
the Church participates in ALL the New Covenant Promises - because the Church is FAITHFUL ISRAEL EXPANDED.
there are NO Old Covenant Promises remaining.
they are fulfilled in Christ ALONE.
the Old Covenant Curses (Law) fell on 1st century Jerusalem - the believers had escaped.
THEY WERE.
AND ARE.
why don't you believe the bible?
why don't you LOVE JESUS enough to know what He said and Keep His Words?
John 10
15even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16"I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.
do Hal Lindsay; John F. Walvoord; D. L. Moody; C.I. Scofield et al mean more than Jesus' words?
are you sure?
i am aware that DSPL says God still owes people Land...they talk about it; describe it...but do not document it from scripture:
LAND PROMISES SUPPOSEDLY NOT FULFILLED BY FAITHFUL GOD:
"God unconditionally promised Abraham's descendants a literal world-wide kingdom over which they would rule through their Messiah who would reign upon King David's throne...Even the animals and reptiles will lose their ferocity and no longer be carnivorous," (The Late Great Planet Earth, Hal Lindsay, p 165)
"The nature of the blessings are earthly, territorial, and national, and have nothing to do with a spiritual church to which none of these blessings has been promised ...Christ is not now on the throne of David bringing blessings to Israel as the prophets predicted, but He is rather on His Father's throne waiting for the coming earthly kingdom and interceding for His own who form the church," (The Millennial Kingdom: A Basic Text in Premillennial Theology, John F. Walvoord, p 205, 1983 AD)
"The foundation of the state of Israel in recent years has been a part of the predicted regathering of scattered Israel back to their ancient land...The present partial possession of the land is a token. The complete possession awaits the coming of Israel's Redeemer" (The Millennial Kingdom: A Basic Text in Premillennial Theology, John F. Walvoord, p 185, 1983 AD)
.....
BUT THE BIBLE SAYS - the Three Promises to Abraham were fulfilled BY FAITHFUL GOD:
Israel possessed all the land God promises to Israel through Abraham.
- God said that if/when Israel got all the land promised, then they would have six cities of refuge.
Deuteronomy 19:7-9
"Therefore, I command you, saying, 'You shall set aside three cities for yourself.' "If the LORD your God enlarges your territory, just as He has sworn to your fathers, and gives you all the land which He promised to give your fathers— if you carefully observe all this commandment which I command you today, to love the LORD your God, and to walk in His ways always—then you shall add three more cities for yourself, besides these three. "
Joshua 20:7-9 lists six cities of refuge - Kadesh, Shechem, Hebron, Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan.
Israel got all the land promised Abraham - can DSPL really read these chapters and deny it? how, i do not know.
Joshua 21:43-45
"So the LORD gave Israel all the land which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they possessed it and lived in it. And the LORD gave them rest on every side, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers, and no one of all their enemies stood before them; the LORD gave all their enemies into their hand. Not one of the good promises which the LORD had made to the house of Israel failed; all came to pass. "
Joshua 23:14-15
"Now behold, today I am going the way of all the earth, and you know in all your hearts and in all your souls that not one word of all the good words which the LORD your God spoke concerning you has failed; all have been fulfilled for you, not one of them has failed. "It shall come about that just as all the good words which the LORD your God spoke to you have come upon you, so the LORD will bring upon you all the threats, until He has destroyed you from off this good land which the LORD your God has given you."
Joshua 24:28
Then Joshua dismissed the people, each to his inheritance.
2 Samuel 8:3
David defeated Hadadezer...as he went to restore his rule at the River [Euphrates].
1 Kings 4:21
Now Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the [Euphrates] River to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt; they brought tribute and served Solomon
2 Chronicles 9:26
And he was the ruler over all the kings from the Euphrates River even to the land of the Philistines, and as far as the border of Egypt.
Nehemiah 9:8
And Thou didst find Abraham's heart faithful before Thee, and didst make a covenant with him to give him the land of the Canaanite, of the Hittite and the Amorite, of the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite-- to give it to his descendants. And Thou hast fulfilled Thy promise, for Thou art righteous.
Jeremiah 11:5
"in order to confirm the oath which I swore to your forefathers, to give them a land flowing with milk and honey, as it is this day." Then I answered and said, "Amen, O LORD."
......
THE PROMISE OF A GREAT NATION FULFILLED BY FAITHFUL GOD - physically and spiritually:
physically:
Genesis 46:3
And He said, "I am God, the God of your father; do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for I will make you a great nation there.
Deuteronomy 1:10
'The LORD your God has multiplied you, and behold, you are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude.
Deuteronomy 10:22
"Your fathers went down to Egypt seventy persons in all, and now the Lord has made you as numerous as the stars of heaven.
Hebrews 11:11-12
since she considered Him faithful who had promised; therefore, also, there was born of one man, and him as good as dead at that, as many descendants as the stars of heaven in number, and innumerable as the sand which is by the seashore.
spiritually:
Romans 4:16-17
For this reason it is by faith, that it might be in accordance with grace, in order that the promise may be certain to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, "A father of many nations have I made you"
Galatians 3:29
if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.
Galatians 4:28
And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise
confirmation of both...in the NT:
Acts 7:17
But as the time of the promise was approaching which God had assured to Abraham, the people increased and multiplied in Egypt
Acts 13:19
And when He had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He distributed their land as an inheritance-- all of which took about four hundred and fifty years.
Romans 4:13
It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith.
to the exclusion of national Israel - WHO SAYS THIS? i mean seriously.
will you folks EVER document who says this?
it's crazy....Jews gave us the Bible.
we all know jews who converted to Christ.
like.....really. is this really the best you can do?
it's just so tiresome.
and it's slanderous and lying. NO ONE SAYS THIS.
to the exclusion of national Israel - WHO SAYS THIS?
the Church participates in ALL the New Covenant Promises - because the Church is FAITHFUL ISRAEL EXPANDED.
there are NO Old Covenant Promises remaining.
they are fulfilled in Christ ALONE.
the Old Covenant Curses (Law) fell on 1st century Jerusalem - the believers had escaped.
THEY WERE.
AND ARE.
why don't you believe the bible?
why don't you LOVE JESUS enough to know what He said and Keep His Words?
John 10
15even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16"I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.
do Hal Lindsay; John F. Walvoord; D. L. Moody; C.I. Scofield et al mean more than Jesus' words?
are you sure?
Dispensational Premillennialism: The Dispensationalist Era
How a once-mocked idea began its domination of the evangelical world.
Timothy Weber
January 1, 1999
Belief in Christ's personal return to set up his earthly kingdom—premillennialism—has always claimed adherents, but few people in the mid-1800s imagined it would attract more than a handful.
Yet by 1875 a new kind of premillennialism called dispensationalism began to spread. Given the embarrassing recent history of premillennialism in the United States (see the story of the Millerites, page 31), its revival was nothing less than amazing.
The new premillennialism came to the United States following the Civil War, after flourishing in Britain among the Plymouth Brethren. One of the Brethren's most gifted teachers was John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), a former priest in the Anglican Church of Ireland, who developed a new variety of futurist premillennialism. He called it dispensationalism, after the division of history into dispensations or eras.
"These periods are marked off in Scripture by some change in God's method of dealing with mankind, in respect to two questions: of sin, and of man's responsibility," explained C. I. Scofield, who popularized Darby's system in America. "Each of the dispensations may be regarded as a new test of the natural man, and each ends in judgment—marking his utter failure in every dispensation."
Dispensationalists quibbled over the number and names of the dispensations, but most American dispensationalists followed Scofield's seven-fold scheme: Innocency (before the Fall), Conscience (Fall to the Flood), Human Government, Promise (Abraham to Moses), Law (Moses to Christ), Grace (the church age), and Kingdom (the millennium).
A.D. 1878
Fundamentalists sign the "Niagra Creed," which includes premillennial teachings.
There was nothing especially radical about dividing history into periods. What separated dispensationalists from everybody else was their novel method of biblical interpretation. Everything in the dispensationalist system seemed to rest on the conviction that God had two completely different plans operating in history: one for an earthly people, Israel, and the other for a heavenly people, the church.
To Darby, the plan for God's earthly people had been revealed through a series of covenants with Israel: the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant, the law-oriented Mosaic Covenant, the royal Davidic Covenant, and a new Messianic Covenant.
Until Messiah's coming, however, God's earthly people must suffer Gentile domination, prophesied by Daniel. This Gentile hegemony would end at the coming of Messiah, 70 weeks after one of the Gentile rulers issues a decree allowing the Jews to return to Jerusalem to repair its broken walls. But when the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, God suspended the prophetic timetable at the end of Daniel's sixty-ninth week and began building a new and heavenly people—the church.
Enrapturing doctrine
Dispensationalists were convinced that God would not deal with the two peoples concurrently. Consequently, it seemed necessary that God remove the church before proceeding with the final plans for Israel.
This led to dispensationalism's most controversial and distinctive doctrine—the secret, any-moment, pre-tribulational Rapture ("catching away") of the church. Earlier premillennialists believed the Rapture would occur at the end of the tribulation, at Christ's second advent. But dispensationalists separated the Rapture (when Christ will come for his saints) from the Second Coming (when he will come with his saints).
Once the heavenly people of God have been raptured, Darby believed, the divine script can be played out to the end. The Antichrist will rise, Christ and his saints will break through the clouds and destroy him and his followers in battle (the Second Coming), the nations of the world will be judged, and Satan will be thrown into a bottomless pit. Then, with the conclusion of Daniel's seventieth week, the victorious Messiah will restore the throne of David, and the millennial kingdom will begin, followed by the Last Judgment and a new heaven and earth. The seven dispensations then over, time shall be no more.
United front
Dispensationalism's first adherents had to overcome some serious public relations problems, especially in establishing their evangelical credentials. For decades most evangelicals did not consider dispensationalism orthodox. Eventually, however, the rise of theological liberalism forced many conservative evangelicals into a close, defensive alliance.
A key example is the Bible conference movement. While Darby was planting his seeds in American soil, a group of conservatives (including premillennialists) founded the Believers' Meeting for Bible Study. Eventually headquartered at Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, and renamed the Niagara Bible Conference, it met for two weeks each summer, aware that it was standing firm for beliefs others were starting to deny.
Premillennialists quickly assumed leadership of the Niagara Conferences. James Brookes presided for more than 20 years and was primarily responsible for drawing up the 1878 "Niagara Creed." In addition to its plank on premillennialism (which gave many Niagara supporters pause), the "creed" affirmed traditional evangelical distinctives such as the authority of the Bible and the absolute necessity of personal conversion to Christ.
Meanwhile, some dispensationalists wanted to focus attention on prophetic themes. Thus the First American Bible and Prophetic Conference was held in New York City in 1878, and was so successful that six more followed. Those convening the conferences noted that "when from any cause some vital doctrine of God's Word has fallen into neglect or suffered contradiction and reproach, it becomes the serious duty of those who hold it … to bring back the Lord's people to its apprehension and acceptance."
Liberalism's "solitary antidote"
Growing more daring because of their increasing visibility and respectability in evangelical circles, dispensationalists frequently made rather extraordinary claims for their distinctive doctrines. Reuben A. Torrey, successor to D. L. Moody on the revival circuit, claimed that premillennial belief in the Second Coming was the ultimate cure for theological infidelity and an impregnable bulwark against liberalism and false cults:
"In the truth concerning our Lord's return is the safeguard against all current heresies, errors, and falsehoods. … It is remarkable how all forms of error touch the doctrine of Christ's second coming, and are shattered by the truth revealed about it in the Scriptures."
William Bell Riley, who eventually led the fundamentalist movement in Minnesota, called pre- millennialism "the sufficient if not solitary antidote to the present apostasy." To arrive at a premillennial position, one had to interpret the Bible literally, thus ensuring that one grasped the other essential doctrines of the faith as well.
Naturally, when premillennialists said such things, they annoyed many of their conservative evangelical allies who thought they could get along just fine without dispensationalism. A. A. Hodge, the Princeton Seminary professor whose doctrine of biblical inerrancy most premillennialists espoused, called the pretribulational rapture of the church "an unscriptural and unprofitable theory."
J. Gresham Machen, the leader of conservative Presbyterians during the 1920s, demonstrated the ambivalent attitude of many evangelicals: He wrote that the rebirth of "premillennialism in the modern church causes us serious concern; it is coupled, we think, with a false method in interpreting Scripture which in the long run will be productive of harm. Yet how great is our agreement with those who hold the premillennial view."
Such criticism always stung premillennialists, who prided themselves on a straightforward, common-sense reading of the Bible. Though they participated in the conservative evangelical alliance, at times premillennialists felt lonely, isolated, and unappreciated. Like it or not, in an age when the truth of a doctrine was often judged by the company it kept, dispensationalists had to defend their doctrine by showing who believed in it.
Leaders found and created
Premillennialists could point to a number of respected and prominent evangelical leaders within their movement. Revivalist D. L. Moody, "Mr. Evangelical" to nearly everyone at the end of the century, was an early convert to premillennialism (though not a very doctrinaire dispensationalist). Nearly every major revivalist from his time to World War I adopted his eschatology.
Premillennialists could also point to a few leaders in the evangelical world missions movement. But by far the most important symbols of dispensationalist respectability were the prominent pastors who gave their congregations steady doses of the new premillennialism.
Early on, dispensationalists devised a way to produce a steady stream of new leadership through the Bible institute movement, which they helped to establish at the end of the nineteenth century as a hedge against liberal theology.
Almost without exception, the scores of Bible institutes founded between 1880 and 1940 taught the new premillennialism. Through the ministries of these schools' graduates—pastors, evangelists, Bible teachers, missionaries, youth workers—dispensationalism spread.
Traditionalists, with a twist
Dispensationalism spread also because its advocates were able to demonstrate some clear continuities with traditional evangelical beliefs and practices.
First was their commitment to biblicism. At a time when conservatives were increasingly concerned about higher criticism of the Bible, premillennialists stood firmly for inerrancy and biblical authority.
Furthermore, premillennialists maintained that anyone could read the Bible and understand it. Dispensationalist teachers agreed that the biblical text was best studied inductively, eliminating the personal bias and pitfalls of subjective interpretations of which the liberals were guilty.
Still, premillennialist Bible teachers insisted one could not do justice to either the Bible's big picture or its smaller parts without a firm grasp of dispensational truth. Ironically, over their inductive method they placed an enormously complex dispensational system and forced the Bible's content to pass through its interpretive grids.
Second, premillennialism was loyal to apostolic doctrine. For the evangelical rank and file, the faith was "once for all delivered to the saints" during the times of the Apostles. Thus the church's task in every age is simply to restate what the Apostles taught, and their words were found in the Bible alone.
Since the Bible clearly contained passages on the apocalyptic return of Jesus, it should be good enough for Christians in modern times.
Third, premillennialism also followed the overt supernaturalism of the evangelical tradition. While liberals were uneasy about such a supernatural worldview, dispensationalism's affirmation of the supernatural was just the thing many Protestants were looking for. Instead of placing God within the historical or evolutionary process, premillennialists still believed in a God who stood outside history and intended to intervene in it—soon.
For better or worse?
By the end of the nineteenth century, premillennialism looked much more believable than postmillennialism. In the eyes of most people, recent events signaled worse times—not better.
Howard Pope, the superintendent of men at Moody Bible Institute, was trained as a postmillennialist at Yale. But his study of missions and world population growth convinced him that the world was not being converted to Christ, as he had been taught to expect. So he "converted to the premillennial view as quickly as Saul was converted to Christ," he said.
Other former postmillennialists said the same thing. It was becoming harder and harder to read the morning newspaper and believe that the Millennium was right around the corner. What looked inevitable in the 1830s—the Christianization of the nation and the world through the success of revivals and reform—no longer seemed possible, short of some miraculous intervention of Jesus himself.
Premillennialists made much of the current problems of society and interpreted them as "signs of the times." Political corruption, pornography, alcohol abuse, the rise of monopolies, labor unrest, the desecration of the Lord's Day by immigrants, worldliness in the church, liberal theology, international conflicts, forest fires, earthquakes, revivals, the rise of cults like Christian Science and Millennial Dawnism (Jehovah's Witnesses), polio and influenza epidemics, changing weather patterns, the rise of Zionism, the sinking of the Titanic, the partitioning of Europe after World War I, radio—these and countless other events and trends were seen as proof that premillennialism was correct and the end of the age was rapidly approaching. Eventually, even its detractors realized that premillennialism seemed plausible.
Still, premillennialism's rise cannot be explained on merely "environmental" grounds. There can be no adequate explanation that does not take into account how the movement sought to maintain important elements from the earlier evangelical tradition.
- Christianity Today
How a once-mocked idea began its domination of the evangelical world.
Timothy Weber
January 1, 1999
Belief in Christ's personal return to set up his earthly kingdom—premillennialism—has always claimed adherents, but few people in the mid-1800s imagined it would attract more than a handful.
Yet by 1875 a new kind of premillennialism called dispensationalism began to spread. Given the embarrassing recent history of premillennialism in the United States (see the story of the Millerites, page 31), its revival was nothing less than amazing.
The new premillennialism came to the United States following the Civil War, after flourishing in Britain among the Plymouth Brethren. One of the Brethren's most gifted teachers was John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), a former priest in the Anglican Church of Ireland, who developed a new variety of futurist premillennialism. He called it dispensationalism, after the division of history into dispensations or eras.
"These periods are marked off in Scripture by some change in God's method of dealing with mankind, in respect to two questions: of sin, and of man's responsibility," explained C. I. Scofield, who popularized Darby's system in America. "Each of the dispensations may be regarded as a new test of the natural man, and each ends in judgment—marking his utter failure in every dispensation."
Dispensationalists quibbled over the number and names of the dispensations, but most American dispensationalists followed Scofield's seven-fold scheme: Innocency (before the Fall), Conscience (Fall to the Flood), Human Government, Promise (Abraham to Moses), Law (Moses to Christ), Grace (the church age), and Kingdom (the millennium).
A.D. 1878
Fundamentalists sign the "Niagra Creed," which includes premillennial teachings.
There was nothing especially radical about dividing history into periods. What separated dispensationalists from everybody else was their novel method of biblical interpretation. Everything in the dispensationalist system seemed to rest on the conviction that God had two completely different plans operating in history: one for an earthly people, Israel, and the other for a heavenly people, the church.
To Darby, the plan for God's earthly people had been revealed through a series of covenants with Israel: the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant, the law-oriented Mosaic Covenant, the royal Davidic Covenant, and a new Messianic Covenant.
Until Messiah's coming, however, God's earthly people must suffer Gentile domination, prophesied by Daniel. This Gentile hegemony would end at the coming of Messiah, 70 weeks after one of the Gentile rulers issues a decree allowing the Jews to return to Jerusalem to repair its broken walls. But when the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, God suspended the prophetic timetable at the end of Daniel's sixty-ninth week and began building a new and heavenly people—the church.
Enrapturing doctrine
Dispensationalists were convinced that God would not deal with the two peoples concurrently. Consequently, it seemed necessary that God remove the church before proceeding with the final plans for Israel.
This led to dispensationalism's most controversial and distinctive doctrine—the secret, any-moment, pre-tribulational Rapture ("catching away") of the church. Earlier premillennialists believed the Rapture would occur at the end of the tribulation, at Christ's second advent. But dispensationalists separated the Rapture (when Christ will come for his saints) from the Second Coming (when he will come with his saints).
Once the heavenly people of God have been raptured, Darby believed, the divine script can be played out to the end. The Antichrist will rise, Christ and his saints will break through the clouds and destroy him and his followers in battle (the Second Coming), the nations of the world will be judged, and Satan will be thrown into a bottomless pit. Then, with the conclusion of Daniel's seventieth week, the victorious Messiah will restore the throne of David, and the millennial kingdom will begin, followed by the Last Judgment and a new heaven and earth. The seven dispensations then over, time shall be no more.
United front
Dispensationalism's first adherents had to overcome some serious public relations problems, especially in establishing their evangelical credentials. For decades most evangelicals did not consider dispensationalism orthodox. Eventually, however, the rise of theological liberalism forced many conservative evangelicals into a close, defensive alliance.
A key example is the Bible conference movement. While Darby was planting his seeds in American soil, a group of conservatives (including premillennialists) founded the Believers' Meeting for Bible Study. Eventually headquartered at Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, and renamed the Niagara Bible Conference, it met for two weeks each summer, aware that it was standing firm for beliefs others were starting to deny.
Premillennialists quickly assumed leadership of the Niagara Conferences. James Brookes presided for more than 20 years and was primarily responsible for drawing up the 1878 "Niagara Creed." In addition to its plank on premillennialism (which gave many Niagara supporters pause), the "creed" affirmed traditional evangelical distinctives such as the authority of the Bible and the absolute necessity of personal conversion to Christ.
Meanwhile, some dispensationalists wanted to focus attention on prophetic themes. Thus the First American Bible and Prophetic Conference was held in New York City in 1878, and was so successful that six more followed. Those convening the conferences noted that "when from any cause some vital doctrine of God's Word has fallen into neglect or suffered contradiction and reproach, it becomes the serious duty of those who hold it … to bring back the Lord's people to its apprehension and acceptance."
Liberalism's "solitary antidote"
Growing more daring because of their increasing visibility and respectability in evangelical circles, dispensationalists frequently made rather extraordinary claims for their distinctive doctrines. Reuben A. Torrey, successor to D. L. Moody on the revival circuit, claimed that premillennial belief in the Second Coming was the ultimate cure for theological infidelity and an impregnable bulwark against liberalism and false cults:
"In the truth concerning our Lord's return is the safeguard against all current heresies, errors, and falsehoods. … It is remarkable how all forms of error touch the doctrine of Christ's second coming, and are shattered by the truth revealed about it in the Scriptures."
William Bell Riley, who eventually led the fundamentalist movement in Minnesota, called pre- millennialism "the sufficient if not solitary antidote to the present apostasy." To arrive at a premillennial position, one had to interpret the Bible literally, thus ensuring that one grasped the other essential doctrines of the faith as well.
Naturally, when premillennialists said such things, they annoyed many of their conservative evangelical allies who thought they could get along just fine without dispensationalism. A. A. Hodge, the Princeton Seminary professor whose doctrine of biblical inerrancy most premillennialists espoused, called the pretribulational rapture of the church "an unscriptural and unprofitable theory."
J. Gresham Machen, the leader of conservative Presbyterians during the 1920s, demonstrated the ambivalent attitude of many evangelicals: He wrote that the rebirth of "premillennialism in the modern church causes us serious concern; it is coupled, we think, with a false method in interpreting Scripture which in the long run will be productive of harm. Yet how great is our agreement with those who hold the premillennial view."
Such criticism always stung premillennialists, who prided themselves on a straightforward, common-sense reading of the Bible. Though they participated in the conservative evangelical alliance, at times premillennialists felt lonely, isolated, and unappreciated. Like it or not, in an age when the truth of a doctrine was often judged by the company it kept, dispensationalists had to defend their doctrine by showing who believed in it.
Leaders found and created
Premillennialists could point to a number of respected and prominent evangelical leaders within their movement. Revivalist D. L. Moody, "Mr. Evangelical" to nearly everyone at the end of the century, was an early convert to premillennialism (though not a very doctrinaire dispensationalist). Nearly every major revivalist from his time to World War I adopted his eschatology.
Premillennialists could also point to a few leaders in the evangelical world missions movement. But by far the most important symbols of dispensationalist respectability were the prominent pastors who gave their congregations steady doses of the new premillennialism.
Early on, dispensationalists devised a way to produce a steady stream of new leadership through the Bible institute movement, which they helped to establish at the end of the nineteenth century as a hedge against liberal theology.
Almost without exception, the scores of Bible institutes founded between 1880 and 1940 taught the new premillennialism. Through the ministries of these schools' graduates—pastors, evangelists, Bible teachers, missionaries, youth workers—dispensationalism spread.
Traditionalists, with a twist
Dispensationalism spread also because its advocates were able to demonstrate some clear continuities with traditional evangelical beliefs and practices.
First was their commitment to biblicism. At a time when conservatives were increasingly concerned about higher criticism of the Bible, premillennialists stood firmly for inerrancy and biblical authority.
Furthermore, premillennialists maintained that anyone could read the Bible and understand it. Dispensationalist teachers agreed that the biblical text was best studied inductively, eliminating the personal bias and pitfalls of subjective interpretations of which the liberals were guilty.
Still, premillennialist Bible teachers insisted one could not do justice to either the Bible's big picture or its smaller parts without a firm grasp of dispensational truth. Ironically, over their inductive method they placed an enormously complex dispensational system and forced the Bible's content to pass through its interpretive grids.
Second, premillennialism was loyal to apostolic doctrine. For the evangelical rank and file, the faith was "once for all delivered to the saints" during the times of the Apostles. Thus the church's task in every age is simply to restate what the Apostles taught, and their words were found in the Bible alone.
Since the Bible clearly contained passages on the apocalyptic return of Jesus, it should be good enough for Christians in modern times.
Third, premillennialism also followed the overt supernaturalism of the evangelical tradition. While liberals were uneasy about such a supernatural worldview, dispensationalism's affirmation of the supernatural was just the thing many Protestants were looking for. Instead of placing God within the historical or evolutionary process, premillennialists still believed in a God who stood outside history and intended to intervene in it—soon.
For better or worse?
By the end of the nineteenth century, premillennialism looked much more believable than postmillennialism. In the eyes of most people, recent events signaled worse times—not better.
Howard Pope, the superintendent of men at Moody Bible Institute, was trained as a postmillennialist at Yale. But his study of missions and world population growth convinced him that the world was not being converted to Christ, as he had been taught to expect. So he "converted to the premillennial view as quickly as Saul was converted to Christ," he said.
Other former postmillennialists said the same thing. It was becoming harder and harder to read the morning newspaper and believe that the Millennium was right around the corner. What looked inevitable in the 1830s—the Christianization of the nation and the world through the success of revivals and reform—no longer seemed possible, short of some miraculous intervention of Jesus himself.
Premillennialists made much of the current problems of society and interpreted them as "signs of the times." Political corruption, pornography, alcohol abuse, the rise of monopolies, labor unrest, the desecration of the Lord's Day by immigrants, worldliness in the church, liberal theology, international conflicts, forest fires, earthquakes, revivals, the rise of cults like Christian Science and Millennial Dawnism (Jehovah's Witnesses), polio and influenza epidemics, changing weather patterns, the rise of Zionism, the sinking of the Titanic, the partitioning of Europe after World War I, radio—these and countless other events and trends were seen as proof that premillennialism was correct and the end of the age was rapidly approaching. Eventually, even its detractors realized that premillennialism seemed plausible.
Still, premillennialism's rise cannot be explained on merely "environmental" grounds. There can be no adequate explanation that does not take into account how the movement sought to maintain important elements from the earlier evangelical tradition.
- Christianity Today
Point one is inherently flawed because of it's ambiguous use of the term literal. Literal means actual, or real, which, in terms of biblical prophecy, can be either natural or spiritual. Dispensationalists equivocate to make literal mean natural without openly making that distinction, and to make it appear that natural things are more real than spiritual things.
But the fact of the matter is that spiritual is more real than natural because the former governs the latter, and the latter passes away whereas the former does not.
If dispensationalism was more honest in its terminology, it would not gain nearly the traction that it does. Can you imagine:
But the fact of the matter is that spiritual is more real than natural because the former governs the latter, and the latter passes away whereas the former does not.
If dispensationalism was more honest in its terminology, it would not gain nearly the traction that it does. Can you imagine:
pretty basic...but there are others i've seen.
will try to find.
A Comparison of Historic Covenant and
Historic Dispensational Theology
Covenant vs. Dispensational > click
will try to find.
A Comparison of Historic Covenant and
Historic Dispensational Theology
Covenant vs. Dispensational > click
E
Agree. We all (covenant and Dispy's) need to see this.
The problem I think happens when we look at prophesy, and think it ALL relates to this. When much of prophesy has little or nothing to do with this.
Prophesy is just Gods way of proving he is God and different from false Gods who can not predict the future to the T. Alot of prophesy is just events which were future when they were given. Have been already fulfilled, or yet to be fulfilled. But just proofs the God of the bible is the one true God.
The problem I think happens when we look at prophesy, and think it ALL relates to this. When much of prophesy has little or nothing to do with this.
Prophesy is just Gods way of proving he is God and different from false Gods who can not predict the future to the T. Alot of prophesy is just events which were future when they were given. Have been already fulfilled, or yet to be fulfilled. But just proofs the God of the bible is the one true God.
Last edited by a moderator:
E
There are a few forms. But for the most part. It is a belief which tries to set world history (past present and future) into different categories. as a means to explain what was, is or will happen to mankind in those different what dispy's call "ages"
example. The time before the sin of man is called the age of innocence, the time we are in now is called the church age.
example. The time before the sin of man is called the age of innocence, the time we are in now is called the church age.
E
This is not the problem, Dispensationalists (at least the ones I know. Are very honest in their terminology.)
1. Literal means real. If God says this is going to happen (even if he uses spiritual forms to show it) then it must happen. otherwise prophesy is usesless.
2. God does use spiritual terms (like animals, beasts etc) to show literal events, Things on earth which literally happened (ie the beast of daniel represented literal kingdoms. And the things and events of those kingdoms literally came true up till the time of Christ.
3. Historical evidence. All prophesies up till the time of Christ LITTERALLY came true, not only till the day (Christs entry to Jerusalem) but his death. If all prophesy up to then came true. Why would we all of a sudden say things after only came true spiritually? Why would God change his means?
4. Spiritual prophesy goes against Gods intended purpose of prophesy. Prophesy proves he is the one true God. If all we need to do is spiritualise it, we can make prophesy anything we want it. The sad part is, it does not prove he is God. if anything, it makes him equal with false prophets. Like nostradomous., who people spiritualise all the time to make his prophesies come true.
5. On the contrary, I believe people spiritualise prophesy only when a literal fulfilment goes against their beliefs, They have no choice. to me this is more dangerous.
1. Literal means real. If God says this is going to happen (even if he uses spiritual forms to show it) then it must happen. otherwise prophesy is usesless.
2. God does use spiritual terms (like animals, beasts etc) to show literal events, Things on earth which literally happened (ie the beast of daniel represented literal kingdoms. And the things and events of those kingdoms literally came true up till the time of Christ.
3. Historical evidence. All prophesies up till the time of Christ LITTERALLY came true, not only till the day (Christs entry to Jerusalem) but his death. If all prophesy up to then came true. Why would we all of a sudden say things after only came true spiritually? Why would God change his means?
4. Spiritual prophesy goes against Gods intended purpose of prophesy. Prophesy proves he is the one true God. If all we need to do is spiritualise it, we can make prophesy anything we want it. The sad part is, it does not prove he is God. if anything, it makes him equal with false prophets. Like nostradomous., who people spiritualise all the time to make his prophesies come true.
5. On the contrary, I believe people spiritualise prophesy only when a literal fulfilment goes against their beliefs, They have no choice. to me this is more dangerous.
This term spiritualize epitomizes what I just said. Its usage is an attempt to marginalize spiritual realities, which are more real (literal) than natural ones. As if spiritual realities are just vapors or something. Thus is the blindness and arrogance of man's fallen nature.
As an example, Christ sitting on the throne of David in heaven on the literal Mt Zion in heavenly Jerusalem is more real than the earthly, natural shadows could ever be.
As an example, Christ sitting on the throne of David in heaven on the literal Mt Zion in heavenly Jerusalem is more real than the earthly, natural shadows could ever be.
E
How so?
Was the lion a literal lion, or a spiritual symbol representing the kingdom of Babylon, which was a literal kingdom.
And not sure what the rest of your statement proves. Would it be more visual to the earth and its inhabitants. and prove God is a God who can predict future events if Jesus is on an unseen throne, or if he is on a seen throne, and the literal inhabitants on the earth from every nation go to him and worship him?
The first proves nothing as far as the world is concerned. The second, No one has an excuse. Who can sit and deny a literal king on earth ruling with an iron rod?? as prophesied.
Was the lion a literal lion, or a spiritual symbol representing the kingdom of Babylon, which was a literal kingdom.
And not sure what the rest of your statement proves. Would it be more visual to the earth and its inhabitants. and prove God is a God who can predict future events if Jesus is on an unseen throne, or if he is on a seen throne, and the literal inhabitants on the earth from every nation go to him and worship him?
The first proves nothing as far as the world is concerned. The second, No one has an excuse. Who can sit and deny a literal king on earth ruling with an iron rod?? as prophesied.