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

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.

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".

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.

"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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Pot < > Kettle

Your general reaching is telling friend

What about salvation?
What country of choice do you frame that doctrine in?

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...

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.