Dispensationalism

[Lees]

No. Read the post again. Almost the whole of Christian history is on one side of this issue, and then there's the theory you advocate.

Again, did I say 'almost all of Christianity for the past 2000 yeas has been wrong'?

No, I didn't. You say I said that. And then you try to argue from there.

Again, you ignore my questions. Why? Because the answers are against you.

Do you know what dispensationalism is? I don't think you do. Yet you believe what you have been told.

Lees

 

[atpollard]

That is immaterial. The doctrine of the Trinity was not developed until the Church age.

Point being...progressive understanding of the Scripture.

Lees

The doctrine of the Trinity STILL does not exist for those that refuse to see it in scripture … OT or NT.
Point being … it was ALWAYS there, whether people choose to admit it or not.
Yes, with more “God breathed” scripture comes more revelation, but only a clearer focus of what was there from the beginning, not a new truth.


The “two greatest commandments” handed down to us in the Gospels from the lips of Jesus (in RED LETTERS) appeared first in the OT and Jesus just quoted them and brought them to the forefront. Not new, just clearer.

 

[atpollard]

'Flights of fantasy'? I see you are one of those who detest dispensationalism. That's fine.

It would be fine, if it were true. However, I do not “detest dispensationalism” and that should have been clear from my opening statement …

Dispensationalism holds its own until one gets to eschatology

There is some merit in the work of dispensationalists when discussing the ‘Eras’ from creation to the Apostolic (and post-Apostolic ’Church Age’). There is virtually no solid biblical support for the speculation on Pre-Tribulation Raptures or Mid-Tribulation Raptures or Post-Tribulation Raptures or Millennial Kingdoms and the plethora of speculative fiction that is passed off as “prophetic” such as the popular “Left Behind” series. I have read detailed speculations on the division of the Church Age into specific sub-dispensations based on the letters to the churches appearing in the opening chapters of Revelation. This leads to detailed (false) predictions on the date of Christ’s return … which other unambiguous verses proclaim is known only to God … and fail when actually examined closely since some churches of each type exist in every time period.

So my criticisms of dispensationalism are specific and based on the claims of dispensationalists, as are my “credit where credits is due” acknowledgements of the strengths of the work of dispensationalist theologians.

 

[atpollard]

Your quote from R.C. Sproul means nothing. Explain why he said what he said. Explain what he meant.

Please correct me if you have a different understanding than I do, but the core of “dispensationalism” is that God relates with people differently in different times (ages or dispensations).

Back to the paraphrased quote:

• “Unless you believe that nothing changed when Adam fell, then we are all dispensationalists to some degree.” - R. C. Sproul

Now to explain it.
How did God relate to Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden?
Man and woman were naked and without sin. God was in the habit of walking and talking with them in the cool of the day. Everything was “very good”.

Fast forward to Genesis 3 and beyond.
Adam and Eve are under a curse. The earth is under a curse. Mankind is expelled from the garden. Brothers are murdering their siblings. Animals are being killed for food and clothing.

Was there a change in the relationship between God and man between Genesis 2 and Genesis 4? Was life in the garden of Eden different from life under the Adamic curse? Is there ANY Christian that does not believe that life in the garden of Eden was a different “dispensation” than life under the Adamic curse?

That is what R.C. Sproul was alluding to.
It is not the concept of a “dispensation” that we disagree on … it is the specific way some people choose to chop scripture and history up into specific dispensations that causes the arguments.

From my personal observations, the greatest heat and least light comes from the question of when to insert a rapture to split two hypothetical dispensations.

 

[atpollard]

How do you determine what is literal and what is symbolic?

All of Revelation is a vision (according to the author) so all of Revelation is symbolic.
The same “yardstick” applies to the visions of Daniel.
That is the nature of “visions”; they employ visual imagery to convey spiritual truths.

 

[atpollard]

What do you disagree with in the dispensational view of eschatology?

The propensity to literalism with the symbolic visions of Daniel and Revelation while ignoring or making symbolic the clearer scriptures on the end times found in the Gospels and Letters. For example, why does “this generation” not mean “this generation” … placing many of the prophecies at Acts 2 and the destruction of the Temple? (as the amillennials claim)

 

[Spindle4]

Yes, I agree, it is interesting.

And all Christians everywhere should recognize that they are dispensational to a certain degree. If you admit to an Old and New Testament, you are dispensational.

Lees

I'll let Paul have the last inspired Word.

(1Co 9:17) For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
(Eph 1:10) That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
(Eph 3:2) If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
(Col 1:25) Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

Strongs G3622
οἰκονομία
oikonomia
oy-kon-om-ee'-ah
From G3623; administration (of a household or estate); specifically a (religious) “economy”: - dispensation, stewardship.
Total KJV occurrences: 8

 

[Lees]

The doctrine of the Trinity STILL does not exist for those that refuse to see it in scripture … OT or NT.
Point being … it was ALWAYS there, whether people choose to admit it or not.
Yes, with more “God breathed” scripture comes more revelation, but only a clearer focus of what was there from the beginning, not a new truth.


The “two greatest commandments” handed down to us in the Gospels from the lips of Jesus (in RED LETTERS) appeared first in the OT and Jesus just quoted them and brought them to the forefront. Not new, just clearer.

No, it exists. Just because there are those who refuse to see it means nothing. Same with 'dispensationalism'. Point being, the Trinity doctrine didn't exist until the Church age.

Lees

 

[Lees]

It would be fine, if it were true. However, I do not “detest dispensationalism” and that should have been clear from my opening statement …



There is some merit in the work of dispensationalists when discussing the ‘Eras’ from creation to the Apostolic (and post-Apostolic ’Church Age’). There is virtually no solid biblical support for the speculation on Pre-Tribulation Raptures or Mid-Tribulation Raptures or Post-Tribulation Raptures or Millennial Kingdoms and the plethora of speculative fiction that is passed off as “prophetic” such as the popular “Left Behind” series. I have read detailed speculations on the division of the Church Age into specific sub-dispensations based on the letters to the churches appearing in the opening chapters of Revelation. This leads to detailed (false) predictions on the date of Christ’s return … which other unambiguous verses proclaim is known only to God … and fail when actually examined closely since some churches of each type exist in every time period.

So my criticisms of dispensationalism are specific and based on the claims of dispensationalists, as are my “credit where credits is due” acknowledgements of the strengths of the work of dispensationalist theologians.

Makes no sense. If there are dispensations found in the Bible, then there is Biblical support for speculating the timing of certain events such as the Rapture.

Lees

 

[Lees]

Please correct me if you have a different understanding than I do, but the core of “dispensationalism” is that God relates with people differently in different times (ages or dispensations).

Back to the paraphrased quote:

• “Unless you believe that nothing changed when Adam fell, then we are all dispensationalists to some degree.” - R. C. Sproul

Now to explain it.
How did God relate to Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden?
Man and woman were naked and without sin. God was in the habit of walking and talking with them in the cool of the day. Everything was “very good”.

Fast forward to Genesis 3 and beyond.
Adam and Eve are under a curse. The earth is under a curse. Mankind is expelled from the garden. Brothers are murdering their siblings. Animals are being killed for food and clothing.

Was there a change in the relationship between God and man between Genesis 2 and Genesis 4? Was life in the garden of Eden different from life under the Adamic curse? Is there ANY Christian that does not believe that life in the garden of Eden was a different “dispensation” than life under the Adamic curse?

That is what R.C. Sproul was alluding to.
It is not the concept of a “dispensation” that we disagree on … it is the specific way some people choose to chop scripture and history up into specific dispensations that causes the arguments.

From my personal observations, the greatest heat and least light comes from the question of when to insert a rapture to split two hypothetical dispensations.

I would agree with how you define dispensationalism's core, though more could be added. This is why I have said that all Christians are dispensational if your Bible contains both the Old and New Testament.

I see you have a problem with the Rapture.

Why 'hypothetical dispensations' ? Was Jesus a hypothesis? Or was He a literal Person? The only record of Him is through the inspired revelation given in the Gospel accounts.

Lees

 

[Lees]

All of Revelation is a vision (according to the author) so all of Revelation is symbolic.
The same “yardstick” applies to the visions of Daniel.
That is the nature of “visions”; they employ visual imagery to convey spiritual truths.

The propensity to literalism with the symbolic visions of Daniel and Revelation while ignoring or making symbolic the clearer scriptures on the end times found in the Gospels and Letters. For example, why does “this generation” not mean “this generation” … placing many of the prophecies at Acts 2 and the destruction of the Temple? (as the amillennials claim)

I was not talking about the book of (Revelation). I was talking about revelation. There are symbols used in the book of (Revelation). The symbols used speak to a literal truth. But, that doesn't mean everything is to be treated as symbolic. Same can be said through out Scripture.

One can ususally find in Scripture the correct 'symbolic' meaning when a symbol is used.

The literal interpretation of the Bible, does not discount the use of symbols, or metaphors, or similes, or allegory, or types. It just doesn't mean the Bible is to be interpreted 'symbolically' or 'allegorically'.

Lees

 

[Lees]

I'll let Paul have the last inspired Word.

(1Co 9:17) For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
(Eph 1:10) That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
(Eph 3:2) If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
(Col 1:25) Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

Strongs G3622
οἰκονομία
oikonomia
oy-kon-om-ee'-ah
From G3623; administration (of a household or estate); specifically a (religious) “economy”: - dispensation, stewardship.
Total KJV occurrences: 8

Yes, and I agree.

And to man is given a certain stewardship or responsibility before God. (Luke 16:1-3)

Lees

 

[Josiah]

Some TV evangelists and writers of popular religious books promote a view of the end times called “dispensationalism.” What is dispensationalism? How does it differ from the biblical teaching about the end of the world?


Dispensationalism (or “premillennial dispensationalism”) is a teaching that divides biblical history into seven distinct periods, or “dispensations,” the last of which is referred to as the Kingdom (the millennium). Dispensationalists focus on this final stage and on discerning historical “signs” of approaching last days.


Typically dispensationalists believe that the end will take place in these stages: (1) a secret return of Christ, with a resurrection of the just and the “rapture” (believers “caught up” with Christ and taken to heaven); (2) a seven-year “tribulation” (when the Antichrist reigns and persecution occurs), with military battles leading up to the Battle of Armageddon; (3) a second, visible return of Christ followed by the sheep/ goats judgment in Matthew 25; (4) a 1,000-year visible reign of Christ on earth; (5) the resurrection of the unjust and the “White Throne Judgment”; (6) the creation of new heavens and earth.


This system of the end times* relies on a rigidly literalistic method of interpreting the Bible, including specifically books such as Ezekiel, Daniel, and Revelation—literature requiring Bible students to take seriously the symbolic language contained in them. Dispensationalists commonly believe that God pursued two purposes in His redemptive plan, one related to the restoration of the nation of Israel in the land (original purpose) and the other dealing with the Christian church (unforeseen in the Old Testament and thus called a “parenthesis”).


John Nelson Darby (1800–82), a traveling preacher, was the first to develop and spread a dispensationalist understanding of Christ’s second coming. Cyrus Scofield expanded Darby’s views and popularized them in his widely influential Scofield Reference Bible (published first in 1909).


Scriptures describe one plan of salvation (not two, one involving national Israel and the other, the Church). That plan began when, after the Fall, God promised a Savior who would suffer and die for the sins of all, Jews and Gentiles alike. His eternal plan was fulfilled in the coming of Jesus Christ, who “was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom. 4:25 ESV). Through faith in Him, all believers are united in His one holy Christian church, the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16). Christians await with expectation Christ’s second and only coming at the end of time (the 1,000-year reign referring symbolically to the time between His Ascension and His second coming—a position called “amillennialism”). They find comfort, not in law-oriented end-time speculations, but in the Bible’s central message, the good news of God’s forgiveness, life, and salvation in Christ.



From an article in "The Lutheran Witness" by Dr. Jerald C. Joersz was an associate executive director of the LCMS Commission on Theology and Church Relations.



.

 

[Josiah]

 

[Lees]

Some TV evangelists and writers of popular religious books promote a view of the end times called “dispensationalism.” What is dispensationalism? How does it differ from the biblical teaching about the end of the world?


Dispensationalism (or “premillennial dispensationalism”) is a teaching that divides biblical history into seven distinct periods, or “dispensations,” the last of which is referred to as the Kingdom (the millennium). Dispensationalists focus on this final stage and on discerning historical “signs” of approaching last days.


Typically dispensationalists believe that the end will take place in these stages: (1) a secret return of Christ, with a resurrection of the just and the “rapture” (believers “caught up” with Christ and taken to heaven); (2) a seven-year “tribulation” (when the Antichrist reigns and persecution occurs), with military battles leading up to the Battle of Armageddon; (3) a second, visible return of Christ followed by the sheep/ goats judgment in Matthew 25; (4) a 1,000-year visible reign of Christ on earth; (5) the resurrection of the unjust and the “White Throne Judgment”; (6) the creation of new heavens and earth.


This system of the end times* relies on a rigidly literalistic method of interpreting the Bible, including specifically books such as Ezekiel, Daniel, and Revelation—literature requiring Bible students to take seriously the symbolic language contained in them. Dispensationalists commonly believe that God pursued two purposes in His redemptive plan, one related to the restoration of the nation of Israel in the land (original purpose) and the other dealing with the Christian church (unforeseen in the Old Testament and thus called a “parenthesis”).


John Nelson Darby (1800–82), a traveling preacher, was the first to develop and spread a dispensationalist understanding of Christ’s second coming. Cyrus Scofield expanded Darby’s views and popularized them in his widely influential Scofield Reference Bible (published first in 1909).


Scriptures describe one plan of salvation (not two, one involving national Israel and the other, the Church). That plan began when, after the Fall, God promised a Savior who would suffer and die for the sins of all, Jews and Gentiles alike. His eternal plan was fulfilled in the coming of Jesus Christ, who “was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom. 4:25 ESV). Through faith in Him, all believers are united in His one holy Christian church, the “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16). Christians await with expectation Christ’s second and only coming at the end of time (the 1,000-year reign referring symbolically to the time between His Ascension and His second coming—a position called “amillennialism”). They find comfort, not in law-oriented end-time speculations, but in the Bible’s central message, the good news of God’s forgiveness, life, and salvation in Christ.



From an article in "The Lutheran Witness" by Dr. Jerald C. Joersz was an associate executive director of the LCMS Commission on Theology and Church Relations.



.

And do you agree and are willing to address and defend all that this author has said in his article?

Lees

 

[Lees]

I see. Once the opponents turn to cartoons, you know they don't have much to offer.

Lees

 

[Albion]

If there are dispensations found in the Bible, then there is Biblical support for speculating the timing of certain events such as the Rapture.

Lees

One more time...if you have now decided that any timing that's attached to events in Scripture justifies your claims here, you are no longer arguing for what's recognized in Christian circles as the POV called "Dispensationalism."

 

[Lees]

One more time...if you have now decided that any timing that's attached to events in Scripture justifies your claims here, you are no longer arguing for what's recognized in Christian circles as the POV called "Dispensationalism."

One more time...If there are dispensations fouind in the Bible, then there is Biblical support for speculating the timing of certain events such as the Rapture.

I don't know what 'christians circles' you are referring to. But I know what dispensationalism is and how it is Scriptural. You can go or travel the circles you want to.

Lees

 

[Lees]

It has been said up to this time, that the core belief of dispensationalism is that God relates to man differently at different times called 'ages' or 'dispensations'. And I agree with that. post #(30)

I also said that everyone is dispensational to a degree if you have both the Old and New Testaments in your Bible. post #(15)

Is there anyone who disagrees with that? Are all willing to say, 'yes, God in the Old Testament related to man differently then He does in the New Testament'?

Lees

 

[Josiah]

speculating

it is Scriptural.

Which is it? Are you "speculating" or is it in Scripture (and no one - not one Christian - in 1900 years noticed)?



.