The Ninety-Five Theses Against Dispensationalism
- Thread starter zone
- 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.
C
All this talk of Amillennialism v/s Despensationalism....who are we to believe? If only there were third option that predates them both. Oh wait, there is....
Historical Premillennialism!
Amillennialism is nothing more than replacement theology, while Dispensationalism is nothing more than wishful thinking.
Last edited:
what is replacement theology?
if you believe there's such a thing as an "heresy" which says the church 'replaced'/displaced israel (apparently that's amillennialIslam), you are a Dispensationalist, since dispensationalists maintain a distinction between the church and israel.
clarify though re: replacement theology - just so i'm clear.
scripture is clear that the church (the called-out) are God's people of faith in the OT (Hebrews 11), the jews who believe(d), and the gentiles who are grafted in - the Israel of God....there's nothing to replace....is there?
trying to claim 'historic premillennialism' doesn't work for you. you're a dispensationalist by admission.
not only by your accusation of 'replacement theology' here, but in other posts.
did believing jews, to whom Christ and the Apostles went first enter the New Covenant or not?
or was The Kingdom Postponed for the jews and they didn't receive the promise of the New Covenant (forgiveness of sins according to Daniel 9)?
~
Let us now go on with our examination of the dispensational theory by looking at the dispensational teaching on the new covenant. Since those twenty-seven books of Scripture that were written after the life of Jesus are named the New Testament or covenant, one would expect that all Christians would uncompromisingly acknowledge the Christian nature of the new covenant. Such an acknowledgment, however, is not easy or simple for the consistent dispensationalist. As it turns out, when the dispensationalist tries to bend Scripture to fit his system, the Biblical data on the new covenant is among the most stubbornly unyielding and uncooperative. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie says the following about dispensational interpretation of the new covenant:
“Although the new covenant is one of the major covenants of Scripture, a clear statement of its meaning and of its relationship to the [dispensational] premillennial system is needed. Even among [dispensational] premillennialists there seems to be a lack of knowledge concerning this covenant.”1
[Dispensational] premillennialists are divided into three groups as far as their interpretation of the new covenant is concerned. This does not evince weakness, for not one of the views contradicts the system.2
The classic passage on the new covenant is Jeremiah 31. Please take note: Jeremiah is an Old Testament prophecy, and dispensationalists teach that no Old Testament prophecy can refer directly to the New Testament church. Dispensationalists interpret Jeremiah 30 and 31 as referring to their futuristic tribulation period which is to occur after the rapture of the church and to their Judaistic millennium.3 The “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:7) is identified with the seven-year tribulation period, and the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 is viewed as a millennial blessing upon Israel.
According to Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost:
“This covenant must follow the return of Christ at the second advent.”4
“This covenant will be realized in the millennial age.”5
Regardless of the relationship of the church to the new covenant as explained in these three views, there is one general point of agreement: the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 must and can be fulfilled only by the nation Israel and not by the Church.6
According to Dr. John F. Walvoord,
… the [dispensational] premillennial position is that the new covenant is with Israel and the fulfillment in the millennial kingdom after the second coming of Christ.7
The [dispensational] premillennial view, though varying in detail, insists that the new covenant as revealed in the Old Testament concerns Israel and requires fulfillment in the millennial kingdom.8
According to Dr. Charles C. Ryrie,
… it can be shown that the period of the new covenant is millennial.9
I very much agree with this last statement by Dr. Ryrie, but will qualify my agreement by identifying the millennium as a present reality just as the New Covenant is (In other words, I affirm the amillennial view). It seems to me that this [dispensationalist premillennial] insistence on identifying the New Covenant as a future reality for Israel in a future earthly reign goes hand in hand with the failure to see the Church as true Israel today (e.g. Romans 2:28-29; 4:11-14; 9:6-8; Gal. 3:7, 28-29; 6:15-16; Phil. 3:3; Rev. 2:9; 3:9). It also goes hand in hand with a failure to see that the Old Testament prophets spoke in much detail regarding this present Church age.
http://kloposmasm.wordpress.com/tag/sam-storms/
if you believe there's such a thing as an "heresy" which says the church 'replaced'/displaced israel (apparently that's amillennialIslam), you are a Dispensationalist, since dispensationalists maintain a distinction between the church and israel.
clarify though re: replacement theology - just so i'm clear.
scripture is clear that the church (the called-out) are God's people of faith in the OT (Hebrews 11), the jews who believe(d), and the gentiles who are grafted in - the Israel of God....there's nothing to replace....is there?
trying to claim 'historic premillennialism' doesn't work for you. you're a dispensationalist by admission.
not only by your accusation of 'replacement theology' here, but in other posts.
did believing jews, to whom Christ and the Apostles went first enter the New Covenant or not?
or was The Kingdom Postponed for the jews and they didn't receive the promise of the New Covenant (forgiveness of sins according to Daniel 9)?
~
Let us now go on with our examination of the dispensational theory by looking at the dispensational teaching on the new covenant. Since those twenty-seven books of Scripture that were written after the life of Jesus are named the New Testament or covenant, one would expect that all Christians would uncompromisingly acknowledge the Christian nature of the new covenant. Such an acknowledgment, however, is not easy or simple for the consistent dispensationalist. As it turns out, when the dispensationalist tries to bend Scripture to fit his system, the Biblical data on the new covenant is among the most stubbornly unyielding and uncooperative. Dr. Charles C. Ryrie says the following about dispensational interpretation of the new covenant:
“Although the new covenant is one of the major covenants of Scripture, a clear statement of its meaning and of its relationship to the [dispensational] premillennial system is needed. Even among [dispensational] premillennialists there seems to be a lack of knowledge concerning this covenant.”1
[Dispensational] premillennialists are divided into three groups as far as their interpretation of the new covenant is concerned. This does not evince weakness, for not one of the views contradicts the system.2
The classic passage on the new covenant is Jeremiah 31. Please take note: Jeremiah is an Old Testament prophecy, and dispensationalists teach that no Old Testament prophecy can refer directly to the New Testament church. Dispensationalists interpret Jeremiah 30 and 31 as referring to their futuristic tribulation period which is to occur after the rapture of the church and to their Judaistic millennium.3 The “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jeremiah 30:7) is identified with the seven-year tribulation period, and the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 is viewed as a millennial blessing upon Israel.
According to Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost:
“This covenant must follow the return of Christ at the second advent.”4
“This covenant will be realized in the millennial age.”5
Regardless of the relationship of the church to the new covenant as explained in these three views, there is one general point of agreement: the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 must and can be fulfilled only by the nation Israel and not by the Church.6
According to Dr. John F. Walvoord,
… the [dispensational] premillennial position is that the new covenant is with Israel and the fulfillment in the millennial kingdom after the second coming of Christ.7
The [dispensational] premillennial view, though varying in detail, insists that the new covenant as revealed in the Old Testament concerns Israel and requires fulfillment in the millennial kingdom.8
According to Dr. Charles C. Ryrie,
… it can be shown that the period of the new covenant is millennial.9
I very much agree with this last statement by Dr. Ryrie, but will qualify my agreement by identifying the millennium as a present reality just as the New Covenant is (In other words, I affirm the amillennial view). It seems to me that this [dispensationalist premillennial] insistence on identifying the New Covenant as a future reality for Israel in a future earthly reign goes hand in hand with the failure to see the Church as true Israel today (e.g. Romans 2:28-29; 4:11-14; 9:6-8; Gal. 3:7, 28-29; 6:15-16; Phil. 3:3; Rev. 2:9; 3:9). It also goes hand in hand with a failure to see that the Old Testament prophets spoke in much detail regarding this present Church age.
http://kloposmasm.wordpress.com/tag/sam-storms/
Last edited:
I suppose this made His Son one as well when He said this in (Mt 21:31,32)...
31 Whether of them twain did the will of [his] father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
32 For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen [it], repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.
Remember that the gifts and calling of God are without repentance (Rom 11:29). If God has chosen to turn ungodliness from Jacob and to put away the sins of that harlot Israel, who are we to judge the mind if the Lord. When they shall see Him, all of Israel that believes will be saved and you can mark it down. The remnant of that harlot that believes will be saved and shall enter into the kingdom.
Rom 11:30-33
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their (the harlot's) unbelief:
31 Even so have these (the harlot) also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32 For God hath concluded them (the harlot and the Gentile dogs) all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
What do you think of that, my favorite swine friend?
31 Whether of them twain did the will of [his] father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
32 For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen [it], repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.
Remember that the gifts and calling of God are without repentance (Rom 11:29). If God has chosen to turn ungodliness from Jacob and to put away the sins of that harlot Israel, who are we to judge the mind if the Lord. When they shall see Him, all of Israel that believes will be saved and you can mark it down. The remnant of that harlot that believes will be saved and shall enter into the kingdom.
Rom 11:30-33
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their (the harlot's) unbelief:
31 Even so have these (the harlot) also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32 For God hath concluded them (the harlot and the Gentile dogs) all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
What do you think of that, my favorite swine friend?
since British Israelism and Dispensationalism are the same creature:
What is the covenant that God made with them? Read Rom. 11:2627. "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer [NEWSFLASH - JESUS DID THIS AT THE FIRST ADVENT], and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."
The expression "so all Israel shall be saved" refers to the manner in which all should be saved, by the gospel.
The word "so" is an adverb. of manner, and "all" does not mean that every individual Jew would be saved, but all who should be saved must be saved in the same manner, "so," as the remnant who had accepted the gospel.
The apostle then adds: "For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."
What was God's covenant unto them? To "turn away ungodliness from Jacob" and "when I shall take away their sins." Paul said: "This is my covenant with them." Can Israel obtain forgiveness now? If so, that covenant exists now. Can a Jew turn from ungodliness now and receive forgiveness? If so, that covenant has been made.
And "so"—in that manner—"all Israel shall be saved"—all of them must be saved alike, just as the remnant by accepting God s new covenant, the gospel of the new testament—"this is my covenant with them, when I shall take away their sins "
Did God force ungodliness from Jacob? Did he unconditionally take away their sins? Did he rob them of their iniquities? And all without their consent? No—God put his laws "into their minds" and wrote the new covenant "into their hearts."—Heb 8:1011.
They should not "teach every man his brother" to know the Lord, for "all shall know" him as a condition of becoming a brother. In the Old Testament it was first a brother or citizen, then teaching. But in the New Covenant it is first teaching, then a brother or citizen. The order is reversed.
So "all shall know me" simply refers to the conditions of becoming a citizen In the new covenant. And God says "their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more." That is the covenant—"this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins"—God's covenant with them was forgiveness.
http://www.seeking4truth.com/British_Israelism.htm << anti-British-Israelism site
What is the covenant that God made with them? Read Rom. 11:2627. "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer [NEWSFLASH - JESUS DID THIS AT THE FIRST ADVENT], and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."
The expression "so all Israel shall be saved" refers to the manner in which all should be saved, by the gospel.
The word "so" is an adverb. of manner, and "all" does not mean that every individual Jew would be saved, but all who should be saved must be saved in the same manner, "so," as the remnant who had accepted the gospel.
The apostle then adds: "For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."
What was God's covenant unto them? To "turn away ungodliness from Jacob" and "when I shall take away their sins." Paul said: "This is my covenant with them." Can Israel obtain forgiveness now? If so, that covenant exists now. Can a Jew turn from ungodliness now and receive forgiveness? If so, that covenant has been made.
And "so"—in that manner—"all Israel shall be saved"—all of them must be saved alike, just as the remnant by accepting God s new covenant, the gospel of the new testament—"this is my covenant with them, when I shall take away their sins "
Did God force ungodliness from Jacob? Did he unconditionally take away their sins? Did he rob them of their iniquities? And all without their consent? No—God put his laws "into their minds" and wrote the new covenant "into their hearts."—Heb 8:1011.
They should not "teach every man his brother" to know the Lord, for "all shall know" him as a condition of becoming a brother. In the Old Testament it was first a brother or citizen, then teaching. But in the New Covenant it is first teaching, then a brother or citizen. The order is reversed.
So "all shall know me" simply refers to the conditions of becoming a citizen In the new covenant. And God says "their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more." That is the covenant—"this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins"—God's covenant with them was forgiveness.
http://www.seeking4truth.com/British_Israelism.htm << anti-British-Israelism site
Last edited:
A
http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/reprints/Middle-East-Crisis-in-Biblical.pdf
i enjoyed this article.
i enjoyed this article.