Why is dispensationalism seen as a heresy?
- Thread starter NotmebutHim
- Start date
-
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.
Marc,
Perhaps you are the exception, but those who try to interpret prophecies as allegorical, symbolical, or the book of Revelation as already fulfilled just cause more and more confusion. There is no question that Dispensationalists bring clarity to the issue (and we are not talking about the lunatic fringe). As eternally-grateful says, there will always be wackos, but they should not be taken as representative. All these date-setters, blood-moon gazers, etc. are probably not even Dispensationalists.
Perhaps you are the exception, but those who try to interpret prophecies as allegorical, symbolical, or the book of Revelation as already fulfilled just cause more and more confusion. There is no question that Dispensationalists bring clarity to the issue (and we are not talking about the lunatic fringe). As eternally-grateful says, there will always be wackos, but they should not be taken as representative. All these date-setters, blood-moon gazers, etc. are probably not even Dispensationalists.
What I see as heretical is the most fundamental distintion of Dispensationalism - that the church and Israel are seperate. This is claimed by both Walvoord and Ryrie, two definers of mordern Dispensationalism. John Darby knew this distinction had to exist in order to justify the pre-trib rapture. .... P .... (I have to do this for paragraphs because this computer or CC is not allowing me to use actual paragraph seperations.) .... P .... The pre-trib rapture existed in late 1820s England. John Darby got wind of it at the Powerscourt Prophesy Conferences in the early 1830s and developed Dispensationalism to justify it. .... P .... Dispensationalism says there are two peoples of God. This is because a plain reading of Mt 24 contradicts the pre-trib rapture. If there are two peoples of God then Mt 24 can apply to Israel and not the church. .... P .... But this leads them to propose that the Jews are saved under the Old Covenant Law - which is heresy according to Paul in Galations. .... P .... The Jews (Israel) are saved the same way the church is - through faith in God. True Dispensationalism says they are saved by following the Old Covenant Laws. This is heresy.
So the question arises for those anti=dispensationists:
How did people receive eternal salvation throughout these different time periods? What did they have to do in order to be "saved"? How was the blood of Jesus applied throughout these different time periods? By believing in the death, burial and resurrection? By believing and doing what God gave them at that time?
God is no repecter of person and He saves a Jew in the same way he says a Gentile by working in them puryifing the hearts of all men in all nations through a work of faith that comes from hearing his voice, the word of God
What they did in order to get saved is to belive God as the faith of God worked in them to both will and do His good pleasure.
Sperating the Jews from the gentiles or time periods as if he worked diffiferntly from one day to the next I would think creates another gospel other than the one that is circumvented in its entirety as it is written
The only way unto salvation is through the blood of Jesus Christ, but how Christ's blood was and is applied may vary. Those before the cross did not receive Christ's blood by believing in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Those before the cross were to trust God and obey His word in whatever He gave them in their time. After the work of the cross, we are to believe on the death, burial and resurrection for sins to receive salvation.
Dispensationalism is not a heresy. it is merely a wrong interpretation of Scripture. Man has always been saved in the same way, by faith in and through the blood of Christ. In the Old Testament this was applied by the shedding of blood which pointed forward to Christ's redemption (Rom 3.24-25). But it was Christ's redemption that saved them. There is no other way of salvation. It is solely through faith, They 'believed God and it was counted to them as righteousness' from Adam, through Abraham and to the present day..
Well?...Since you put it "that" way? Does not using the term "method of translating Scripture" raise any flags betweenst yer ears? Does this not reek of tradition? To you? It should!
But? That's OK, brother! You keep on preaching from the ditch! And carry as many of your "genuine" Christians with you, as you see fit! Goodly intenetions, does not an Holy Priesthood make!
But? That's OK, brother! You keep on preaching from the ditch! And carry as many of your "genuine" Christians with you, as you see fit! Goodly intenetions, does not an Holy Priesthood make!