John MacArthur claims "no allegories in Scripture" - dispensationalist delusions

  • 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.

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
I'm not sure what you are saying but my position is that the kingdom of God has already been inaugurated, the new creation was begun with the resurrection of Jesus' physical body, and creation awaits final consummation (New Heavens/New Earth) at the return of Jesus. Jesus now rules from heaven. Believers are already participating in the New Creation in an incomplete sense, and will experience the fullness at the resurrection, when death is totally defeated. That is why it is absurd, in my not-so-humble opinion, to have a Millennium with physical people still experiencing death and corruption after Jesus returns. Death is totally defeated at his coming.

Additionally, those who are joined with Christ will experience his resurrection at his return. They are joined to their Lord so defeat of Satan and evil is inevitable. Again, my eschatology is tied to my soteriology.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
I'm on the statement "the return of Christ". I believe it is a spiritual reality now and all along, rather than a physical appearance of Christ sometime in the future. Jesus at His sentencing said that same thing "..from now on, you'll see the son of man sitting at the right hand of God and coming with the clouds of heaven"
How can this then turn into an event in the distant future when He was actually telling the Sanhedrin and those in attendance in the 1st century.
That's a curious verse as it is worded awkwardly. However, Jesus is ruling now from heaven.

Here's some notes from a study bible that I like:

Matthew 26:64 from now on you will see. Jesus probably speaks of the process of exaltation to the right hand of the Father that begins with His humiliation and death. The Jewish leaders will soon “see” in the resurrection reports of the soldiers (28:11-15) and Stephen’s eyewitness testimony of the majesty of the exalted Christ (Acts 7:56) that the one whom they had killed is the Messiah He claimed to be. At Pentecost some fifty days later, the descent of the Spirit, which enables believers to proclaim God’s mighty works in the tongues of the nations, will give evidence of Jesus’ heavenly enthronement (Acts 2:6-11, 32, 33).
(Reformation SB)

Do you have more verses supporting your view? We should not form our theology based on a single ambiguous verse.

Do you believe that Jesus will bodily rule at his return?
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
4,072
705
113
That's a curious verse as it is worded awkwardly. However, Jesus is ruling now from heaven.

Here's some notes from a study bible that I like:

Matthew 26:64 from now on you will see. Jesus probably speaks of the process of exaltation to the right hand of the Father that begins with His humiliation and death. The Jewish leaders will soon “see” in the resurrection reports of the soldiers (28:11-15) and Stephen’s eyewitness testimony of the majesty of the exalted Christ (Acts 7:56) that the one whom they had killed is the Messiah He claimed to be. At Pentecost some fifty days later, the descent of the Spirit, which enables believers to proclaim God’s mighty works in the tongues of the nations, will give evidence of Jesus’ heavenly enthronement (Acts 2:6-11, 32, 33).
(Reformation SB)

Do you have more verses supporting your view? We should not form our theology based on a single ambiguous verse.

Do you believe that Jesus will bodily rule at his return?
And who was being spoken of here:

Heb 10: 25not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching. .....
36You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. 37For,
In just a little while, he who is coming will come and will not delay.

This in the form of a letter and there's no way the recipients read and thought to themselves "ooh, this must be in distant future".
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
And who was being spoken of here:

Heb 10: 25not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching. .....
36You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. 37For,
In just a little while, he who is coming will come and will not delay.

This in the form of a letter and there's no way the recipients read and thought to themselves "ooh, this must be in distant future".
I'm not a preterist but I can see how some fall into that camp if they don't harmonize all of Scripture and look at selective verses.
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
2,658
667
113
OK..so one issue I would have is that I think it's an assumption to call them parallel verses. We aren't even sure Isaiah 24 and Revelation are referring to the same events.


Just a quick remark..in regards to the expectation the apostles had regarding a literal kingdom, the apostles held a number of wrong ideas including, for many years, the idea that Gentiles added to the church needed to observe the Mosaic Law. This wasn't really rejected until about AD 44. Additionally, I believe that the events of Acts indicate that Jesus, through union with the believers mediated by the Holy Spirit, was establishing his kingdom through conversions, and these conversions extended to various groups throughout the book of Acts.

However, the verse you referenced would be one of the stronger "proof-texts" of dispensationalism if I was looking for one. I think it's weak to depend on the apostle's understanding of a literal kingdom which would arise immediately to support a dispensationalist view. I believe their misunderstandings were gradually addressed as Acts played out.

I believe I'm going to finish studying some amillennial materials I have, and then read a few books that a dispensationalist pastor recommended to me in the past:

There Really Is a Difference, Renald Showers
The Greatness of the Kingdom, Alva McClain

He is a Grace Theological Seminary graduate. Additionally, a dispensationalist pastor from Moody Bible Institute referred me to Showers in the past.

It is really hard to nail down dispensationalists, though, because there are so many different variations within the dispensationalist camp. Like I said, it's like nailing jello to the wall to pin them down on much.

And, when it comes down to it, I know certain soteriological concepts are true, namely union with Christ, and dispensationalism simply doesn't work with that.
"I believe I'm going to finish studying some amillennial materials I have, and then read a few books that a dispensationalist pastor recommended to me in the past:"

I am glad
Amil is basically impossible
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
2,658
667
113
I'd advise you as an Amillenialist to be honest with the prophetic scriptures and consider them all fulfilled. You will go nowhere arguing with dispensationalists of any stripe.

Jesus stated that all prophecy would be fulfilled in the days of vengeance:

(Luke 21:20 But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near.)

(Luke 21:22 because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled.)

Hopefully you won't pull a dispensationalists here in Luke 21:22 and claim He didn't mean ALL but some. ALL is also stated by Peter to confirm Jesus' statement:

(Acts 3:24 “And likewise, all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and his successors onward, also announced these days.)

Peter previously stated "these days" were the last days he was living in:

(Acts 2:17 And it shall be in the last days, God says "that I will pour forth my spirit. . . ) etc.

The last days of Peter prophetic announcements advanced to the last hour went John wrote of the antichrists:

(1 John 2:18 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. )

Paul also stated that the prophetic events in the bible and reiterated by Christ were coming to completion and that the goal or point aimed at was coming true when he wrote, not hundreds of years later.

(1 Cor 10:11 Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.)

Paul used telos (ends):

--------------------------------
G5056 telos tel'-os

from a primary tello (to set out for a definite point or goal);

properly, the point aimed at as a limit, i.e. (by implication) the conclusion of an act or state (termination (literally, figuratively or indefinitely), result (immediate, ultimate or prophetic), purpose); specially, an impost or levy (as paid).
--------------------------------

What Paul is saying is the goal of the ages was being fulfilled in his days (Peter's "last days") which was the fulfillment of "all things" in "the days vengeance" as stated by Christ in Luke 21:22.

To be looking for further prophetic fulfillment is to misread simple statements in the bible.
The bible leaves the church with this ending.
"...the spirit and the bride say come Lord Jesus..."

They do not say any such thing in the mil
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
2,658
667
113
I'm not sure what you are saying but my position is that the kingdom of God has already been inaugurated, the new creation was begun with the resurrection of Jesus' physical body, and creation awaits final consummation (New Heavens/New Earth) at the return of Jesus. Jesus now rules from heaven. Believers are already participating in the New Creation in an incomplete sense, and will experience the fullness at the resurrection, when death is totally defeated. That is why it is absurd, in my not-so-humble opinion, to have a Millennium with physical people still experiencing death and corruption after Jesus returns. Death is totally defeated at his coming.

Additionally, those who are joined with Christ will experience his resurrection at his return. They are joined to their Lord so defeat of Satan and evil is inevitable. Again, my eschatology is tied to my soteriology.
Rev 19.
Amil can not possibly allagorize that away.
And they do die physically. Because satan is losed after the mil and there is a final slaughter
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
Maybe you can answer these questions:

1. What Scriptures do you think entitle Israel a Millennial kingdom?
2. Are these promises unconditional in nature, and not dependent upon performance?
3. Do these promises include all Israelites, over all time, and if not, why?
4. If all believers, Jew and Gentile, are joined to Christ, and Jesus is the perfectly obedient Israelite, and they inherit all things through him, what difference does it make?
5. Abraham is the heir of the entire world, not just a specific land, per Romans 4, so, again, what difference does it make if believers are
spiritual Israelites?
6. Do you believe that Israel will be performing animal sacrifices in the Millennium, as the prophets seemed to indicate under a
literal interpretation as dispensationalists view those Scriptures?
7. Do you think these promises are to all Israelites, or only the elect, redeemed individuals within Israel? And if you answer with the elect, redeemed remnant, what is different about their inheritance versus the inheritance of the non-Israelite believer?

As I have said, given the doctrine of union with Christ, and the fact that believers become perfectly obedient Israelites through their union with Christ, I believe dispensationalism is absurd.

AND....I believe God honors all of his promises. I think it is possible some dispensationalists are claiming conditional promises are unconditional, some were already fulfilled in Israel's history, and some are given to Abraham's true descendants, which are all believers, and include both Jew and Gentile.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
Rev 19.
Amil can not possibly allagorize that away.
And they do die physically. Because satan is losed after the mil and there is a final slaughter
You are assuming a premillennial worldview. I don't hold your worldview. I am amillennial.

The slaughter that you think occurs after the Millennium is actually an event that happens prior to Christ's return.

Premillennialists believe there are two separate events, one battle prior to the Millennium and one battle after the Millennium. Amillennials believe it is the same battle, and the two separate visions have overlapping content including the same battle.

Again, this comes from reading Revelation as a series of events, and not as a number of separate visions that have overlapping content in parts. I don't read Revelation like this. I recommend GK Beale's shorter commentary on Revelation for more explanation.

Like I mentioned before, if you look at the end of Rev 11, which portrays final events just prior to Jesus' return, and compare it to Rev 12, which portrays events at Christ's birth, it is easy to see that there are separate visions with overlapping content as these events are not in the proper sequence if one assumes a premillennial view.

The same inconsistencies can be noticed in other sections, where the return of Jesus is described, and then events prior to his return are presented.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
"I believe I'm going to finish studying some amillennial materials I have, and then read a few books that a dispensationalist pastor recommended to me in the past:"

I am glad
Amil is basically impossible
LOL.

This is hilarious.

I am an American, but I am amazed how my fellow Americans are so committed to a teaching that I find to lack credibility. The view only existed within the past 200 years, and it is full of problems. And, they are so extremely inconsistent in their own camps with their presentation of what it teaches. You don't find this inconsistency within amillennial groups.

Additionally, it causes believers to be sidetracked with all kinds of prophecy guys and their speculations.
 

UnderGrace

Senior Member
May 8, 2016
9,432
5,880
113
6. Do you believe that Israel will be performing animal sacrifices in the Millennium, as the prophets seemed to indicate under a
literal interpretation as dispensationalists view those Scriptures?
I find this view to be especially problematic especially in light of Hebrews.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
I find this view to be especially problematic especially in light of Hebrews.
Me, too...their response is that it is for a memorial but I find the idea of animal sacrifices after Jesus' sacrifice to be a big issue.

I think some dispensationalists reject this idea, but it is common enough to be held by dispensationalist pastors I know.

However, if they are following their literal hermeneutic, they would believe that animal sacrifices will be reinstituted in the Millennium. There is no room for viewing these verses in another manner.

As a non-dispensationalist, my view of those Scriptures would be that the prophet was communicating truths to his audience in terms they could understand, in that there would be a restoration of devotion to God, rather than claiming that animal sacrifices would be reinstituted after Christ's one-time sacrifice.

They aren't allowed to reason like that, though..it's against their rules. Some rebels within their camp might do it anyways to apply some Scotch tape to their theology :)
 

preston39

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2017
1,675
240
63
"I believe I'm going to finish studying some amillennial materials I have, and then read a few books that a dispensationalist pastor recommended to me in the past:"

I am glad
Amil is basically impossible

Do yourself a favor ................................and study the Bible.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
Do yourself a favor ................................and study the Bible.
The guy who made the remark isn't the one that is proposing studying other materials; I am.

I study the Bible regularly but I also interact with other godly men who have focused on a specific topic. Over my 34 years of being a Christian, I realize that Christianity is a community and I can learn from others. The "lone ranger" Christian who despises other godly men and claims Christianity is about him and his Bible is displaying his pride, and I'm past that stage. Of course, I carefully evaluate their use of Scripture and their reasoning and am cautious.
 

preston39

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2017
1,675
240
63
The guy who made the remark isn't the one that is proposing studying other materials; I am.

I study the Bible regularly but I also interact with other godly men who have focused on a specific topic. Over my 34 years of being a Christian, I realize that Christianity is a community and I can learn from others. The "lone ranger" Christian who despises other godly men and claims Christianity is about him and his Bible is displaying his pride, and I'm past that stage. Of course, I carefully evaluate their use of Scripture and their reasoning and am cautious.

The point is that we are confronted with many that will miss lead you on proper scripture application today. There are many new new age religion approaches that fly direct in conflict with G-d's word and plan intent.

Test all writings with His word.
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
2,658
667
113
You are assuming a premillennial worldview. I don't hold your worldview. I am amillennial.

The slaughter that you think occurs after the Millennium is actually an event that happens prior to Christ's return.

Premillennialists believe there are two separate events, one battle prior to the Millennium and one battle after the Millennium. Amillennials believe it is the same battle, and the two separate visions have overlapping content including the same battle.

Again, this comes from reading Revelation as a series of events, and not as a number of separate visions that have overlapping content in parts. I don't read Revelation like this. I recommend GK Beale's shorter commentary on Revelation for more explanation.

Like I mentioned before, if you look at the end of Rev 11, which portrays final events just prior to Jesus' return, and compare it to Rev 12, which portrays events at Christ's birth, it is easy to see that there are separate visions with overlapping content as these events are not in the proper sequence if one assumes a premillennial view.

The same inconsistencies can be noticed in other sections, where the return of Jesus is described, and then events prior to his return are presented.
Nope
Just looking at rev 19 as the no brainer it is.
Amils complicate.
It is the nature of the doctrine.
A string of assumptions,then accuse others of not following your grand canyon leaps to EXPLAIN AWAY what is written and OBVIOUSLY future.
 

Absolutely

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2018
2,658
667
113
LOL.

This is hilarious.

I am an American, but I am amazed how my fellow Americans are so committed to a teaching that I find to lack credibility. The view only existed within the past 200 years, and it is full of problems. And, they are so extremely inconsistent in their own camps with their presentation of what it teaches. You don't find this inconsistency within amillennial groups.

Additionally, it causes believers to be sidetracked with all kinds of prophecy guys and their speculations.
What about salvation?
What country of choice do you frame that doctrine in?
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
2,815
588
113
[…] Believers are already participating in the New Creation in an incomplete sense, and will experience the fullness at the resurrection, when death is totally defeated. That is why it is absurd, in my not-so-humble opinion, to have a Millennium with physical people still experiencing death and corruption after Jesus returns. Death is totally defeated at his coming.
Additionally, those who are joined with Christ will experience his resurrection at his return. They are joined to their Lord so defeat of Satan and evil is inevitable. Again, my eschatology is tied to my soteriology.
Do you believe ALL believers must "die" (necessitating a "resurrection") BEFORE He comes/returns/His Second Coming? (since "death" is totally defeated at that time [according to your understanding of 1Cor15:24, not mine ;) ], and it seems you are suggesting that in order for it to be "defeated" it must have been "experienced" [/actualized] in time/history, at some point, for any and all believers)

My view, as you may recall, is that "[bodily] resurrection [from the dead]" will not be experienced by those not having actually DIED, and that "resurrection" (except for those passages referring to "Israel" coming up out of the "graveyard of nations"--so not being 'a bodily resurrection from being formerly-physically dead,' there) ['resurrection'] means "to stand again [on the earth]" and pertains to "formerly-physically-DEAD" people [/saints, in the "resurrection OF LIFE" of course]; yet 1Cor15:51-54 is saying that both "the DEAD IN Christ," AND the "we [in Christ] which are ALIVE and remain unto" is who [in this "I tell you a mystery" section] that this "death is swallowed up in victory" applies to [not that it is the only (singular) point in time that "bodily resurrection from being formerly-dead" will take place, in the chronology that is revealed in Scripture], meaning, both of the "still-ALIVE" and the "having-previously-DIED" believers. [2Cor5:3-4 is speaking SOLELY of those "STILL-ALIVE" portion of "the Church which is His body [/believers]" as THAT is the focus of Paul's thought in those 2 verses]

As far as it not being ONLY ONE point-in-time of the chronology laid out in Scripture [re: "resurrection"] , I ask you to consider a post I made some time back (in the context of a different convo), essentially making two points about the "ORDER/SEQUENCE" of "resurrection" (meaning, that there doesn't remain only ONE)...

Consider:

[quoting my old post]

"[again, my viewpoint: "[re: resurrection] but each [G1538 - Hekastos - [defined as-->] 'each (of more than two)'] IN HIS OWN ORDER" 1Cor15:23; "blessed and holy is the one having A PART [G3313 - meros] in the first resurrection" Rev20:6... that is, in "the resurrection OF LIFE" Jn5:29--The 2W are included in this "resurrection OF LIFE" but are seen to be resurrected and ascended up to Heaven BEFORE the 7th Trumpet sounds (and so is "the Church which is His body" even earlier than that point in the chronology, which is what 1Cor15:51-54 is making a point to say, not to mention the "chronology/sequence" explanations found in passages such as 1Th and 2Th, and 2Tim4:8/Rev4:4/Rev5:9/Eph4:30, pertaining to same)]"

[end quoting my post]


There's more I could say, but this post is already long enough... :)
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
581
319
63
What about salvation?
What country of choice do you frame that doctrine in?
I don't know what you're asking.

Dispensationalism is largely an American position on eschatology. Amillennialism is much more common in Europe.

However my guess is that Africans, when they focus on eschatology, are dispensationalist because of the Pentecostal/charismatic influence. These groups tend to be dispensationalists.