or
"What
is indisputably, absolutely, and uncompromisingly essential to the Christian
religion is its doctrine of salvation... If Dispensationalism has actually
departed from the only way of salvation which the Christian religion teaches,
then we must say it has departed from Christianity. No matter how many other
important truths it proclaims, it cannot be called Christian if it empties
Christianity of its essential message. We define a cult as a religion which
claims to be Christian while emptying Christianity of that which is essential to
it. If Dispensationalism does this, then Dispensationalism is a cult and not a
branch of the Christian church. It is as serious as that. It is impossible to
exaggerate the gravity of the situation."
John
H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of
Dispensationalism (Brentwood TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), 150.
3.
Is Dispensational Premillennialism Different from Historic
Premillennialism?
4.
How Does Dispensationalism Deny the Gospel?
5.
How the Pretribulational Rapture Denies the Gospel
6.
Questions for Dispensationalists
7.
Appendices
o
Glossary
o
Consistent
Dispensationalism
Now
I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary
to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such
serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair
speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. -Romans 16:17-18 KJV
Why
do so many who call themselves Christian continually argue among themselves and
with others about doctrine? Are not all who name Christ united by the Holy
Spirit into Christ's body? Doesn't every church teach the same basic doctrine?
If this were so there would have been no need for Paul to admonish young pastor
Timothy"Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine...",
for the Councils of the early church to define the creeds and oppose false
teachings, for Martin Luther's 95 Theses, the Augsburg Confession, nor in fact
for the Reformation as a whole.
If
I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the
truth of God except precisely that point which the world and the devil are at
that moment attacking, then I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be
professing Him. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is
proved; and to be steady on all the battlefront besides is merely flight and
disgrace if he flinches at that point. -Martin Luther
Since
Christian doctrine was first defined there have been continuous assaults, both
overt and insidious, to lead astray those whose faith is not firmly grounded in
Christ and sound doctrine. The church has attempted to deal with this fact by
defining creeds and confessions, teaching catechisms, and requiring pastors to
be trained by orthodox institutions.
Unfortunately,
most of the American church has been caught up in a form of revivalism that
replaces creeds with "testimonies", catechisms with "Youth Group
Pizza Nite", and theological training of pastors with church growth
seminars. Most laymen, and many preachers, have a difficult time putting into
words exactly what they believe, and of the few who can make a statement of
doctrine fewer still can cite the scriptural basis, history, or make a logical
defense of said doctrine. Such is the curse of a theology based upon feelings
and experience rather than Word and Sacrament.
Paul,
the apostle, was adamant on the subject of doctrine. His admonition quoted from
the Epistle to the Romans was not to avoid the issue of doctrine, but rather to
mark those who teach doctrine contrary to that which was once for all
delivered to the saints. Jude agrees that Christian doctrine was settled at the
time of the writing of his Epistle, but that heresy was creeping into the
church.
"Beloved,
while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I
found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the
faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. For certain men have crept
in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men,
who turn the grace of our God into lewdness and deny the only Lord God and our
Lord Jesus Christ." -Jude 1:3-4
Are
we, as Christians, to divide over any and all issues? The ever increasing number
of denominations and sects has been caused primarily by disputes over what was
considered by those involved to be doctrinal issues. Many will argue over food
or drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, and while such
issues may have legitimacy in regard to physical health or preferences in forms,
the dividing line should be drawn over much more substantial criteria.
Dispensationalism
is a form of premillennialism originating among the Plymouth Brethren in the
early 1830's. The father of dispensationalism, John Nelson Darby, educated as a
lawyer and ordained Anglican priest, was one of the chief founders of the
Plymouth Brethren movement, which arose in reaction against the perceived empty
formalism of the Church of England. To the Brethren the true
"invisible" church was to come out of the apostate "visible"
Church, rejecting such forms as priesthood and sacraments.
Dispensational
theology centers upon the concept of God's dealings with mankind being divided
into (usually) seven distinct economies or "dispensations", in which
man is tested as to his obedience to the will of God as revealed under each
dispensation.
Dispensationalists
see God as pursuing two distinct purposes throughout history, one related to an
earthly goal and an earthly people (the Jews), the other to heavenly goals and a
heavenly people (the church).1
Dispensationalists
believe that in the Old Testament God promised the Jewish people an earthly
kingdom ruled by Messiah ben David, and that when Christ came He offered this
prophesied kingdom to the Jews. When the Jews of the time rejected Christ and
the earthly kingdom, the promise was postponed, and the "mystery form"
of the kingdom - the church - was established.
The
church, according to dispensational doctrine, was unforeseen in the Old
Testament and constitutes a "parenthesis" in God's plan for Israel. In
the future, the distinction between Jew and Gentile will be reestablished and
will continue throughout all eternity. The "parenthesis", or church
age, will end at the rapture when Christ comes invisibly to take all believers
(excepting OT saints) to heaven to celebrate the "marriage feast of the
Lamb" with Christ for a period of seven years.2
God's
program for the Jews then resumes with the tribulation, Antichrist, bowls of
wrath, 144,000 Jews preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom, and Armageddon. Then,
the Second (third, if you count the preTrib rapture) Coming, the instantaneous
conversion of the entire nation of Israel, the resurrection of the Tribulation
and Old Testament saints, and the "sheep and goats" judgment. The
"goats" will be cast into hell, the "sheep" and the
believing Jews will enter the millennium in natural human bodies, marrying,
reproducing, and dying. The "mystery church" and the resurrected
Tribulation and Old Testament saints will live in the heavenly Jerusalem
suspended above the earthly city. This millennium will be a time of great peace
and prosperity, with Christ ruling on David's throne. After 1,000 yrs. Satan
will be released from the chain with which he had been bound at the beginning of
the millennium and many of the children born to the "sheep" and the
Israelites will follow him in revolt against Christ. The King will again destroy
His enemies, followed by another resurrection of the righteous, another
resurrection of the unrighteous, a final judgment, and at last the New Heavens
and the New Earth.
Although
premillennial thought has been recorded in the early church, dispensational
theology and its pursuant eschatology are new, as even the father of the system
admitted -
"I
think we ought to have something more of direct testimony as to the lord's
coming, and its bearing also on the state of the church: ordinarily, it would
not be well to have it so clear, as it frightens people. We must pursue it
steadily; it works like leaven, and its fruit is by no means seen yet; I do not
mean leaven as ill, but the thoughts are new, and people's minds work on them,
and all the old habits are against their feelings - all the gain of situation,
and every worldly motive; we must not be surprised at its effect being slow on
the mass, the ordinary instruments of acting upon others having been trained in
most opposite habits." - LETTERS OF J.N.D., vol.1 pg.25-26
The
new doctrine was widely accepted in America, due to popular prophetic meetings
such as the Niagara Bible Conferences. C.I. Scofield promulgated dispensational
thought in his Scofield Reference Bible. Dispensational Bible institutes by the
hundreds have sprung up across the continent - notably Moody Bible Institute and
Dallas Theological Seminary. Media evangelists such as Jerry Fallwell, Pat
Robertson, Jack Van Impe, and Hal Lindsey popularize dispensational eschatology
today. Most likely you have heard these doctrines taught over Christian radio
programs, and yes, from your own church's pulpit, though probably no one defined
the theological system as dispensationalism nor the origination as Darby circa
1832.
Dispensationalists
view the teaching as a return to Biblical theology, after nearly 1,800 years of
darkness. But, since the day Darby began to preach the doctrine, Godly men have
opposed. Many books have been published exposing the flaws in the intricate
system. Most hack away at the branches, arguing peripheral issues. We intend to
lay the axe to the root of the tree.
"My
brother, I am a constant reader of my Bible, and I soon found that what I was
taught to believe (by Darby's doctrine) did not always agree with what my Bible
said. I came to see that I must either part company with John Darby, or my
precious Bible, and I chose to cling to my Bible and part from Mr. Darby."
- George Müeller, a contemporary and one time supporter of Darby quoted by
Robert Cameron in his book SCRIPTURAL TRUTH ABOUT THE LORD'S RETURN,
pp.146-7
Please
understand that Dispensational Premillennialism and classic Historic
Premillennialism are two very different systems of eschatology:
From:
THE BIBLE AND THE FUTURE by Dr. Wick Broomall
Historic
Premillennialism is considered to be an orthodox Christian millennial system.
Arguments posited against this older form of chiliasm will be in the nature of a
disagreement among brethren about non-essentials. The dispensational system,
however, differs from orthodox Christian doctrine in many areas. Most of these
aberrations will, if seriously considered, end in the denial of the everlasting
gospel.
I
marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of
Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who
trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an
angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to
you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone
preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be
accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if
I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ. -Gal 1:6-10
Dispensationalists
have long been accused of teaching multiple methods of salvation. Dispensational
leaders (excepting the Bullingerite or Consistent sects) have long denied these
charges. Denial without refutation is, however, meaningless. Let us examine some
of the evidence.
C.I.
Scofield (1843-1921) pastor of the First Congregational Church in Dallas, Texas,
and then of Moody Church, Northfield, Massachusetts, discussed with Arno C.
Gaebelein his plan to write an annotated version of the Bible in 1901 :
"One
night, about the middle of that week, Dr. Scofield suggested, after the evening
service, that we take a stroll along the shore. It was a beautiful night. Our
walk along the shore of the sound lasted until midnight. For the first time he
mentioned the plan of producing a reference Bible, and outlined the method he
had in mind. He said he had thought of it for many years and had spoken to
others about it, but had not received much encouragement. The scheme came to him
in the early days of his ministry in Dallas, and later, during the balmy days of
the Niagara Conferences he had submitted his desire to a number of brethren, who
all approved of it, but nothing came of it. He expressed the hope that the new
beginning and this new testimony in Sea Cliff might open the way to bring about
the publication of such a Bible with references and copious footnotes." -Moody
Monthly 43 ( 1943 ) : 278.
The
end result of this discussion was the Scofield Reference Bible of 1909,
combining an attractive format, notes, and cross references which became perhaps
the most influential tome of dispensational theology to date. "The
teachings of dispensational premillennialism on prophecy have spread widely in
Canada and the United States, due especially to the influence of the 1909
Scofield Reference Bible and it subsequent editions."3
The theology presented by Scofield in his Reference Bible is normative
dispensational doctrine, thus the significance of the quote here:
"As
a dispensation, grace begins with the death and resurrection of Christ....The
point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the condition of salvation, but
acceptance or rejection of Christ, with good works as a fruit of salvation"4
Scofield
here states that salvific grace is a New Testament phenomenon, unavailable in
previous dispensations. Notice that Scofield explains that legal obedience was
the condition of salvation in the previous dispensation, but that now faith in
Christ is the condition that must be met. This is consistent with Scofield's
definition of a dispensation.
A
dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect of
obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God.5
If,
indeed, man is tested in respect to obedience to the will of God in each of
these "dispensations", what is the reward - or punishment? If the
reward is salvation, as obviously Scofield taught concerning the dispensation of
Law, that salvation is not of grace but of works! The dispensationalist,
misunderstanding the concept of Law and Gospel, offers salvation to those who
meet the condition of the "dispensation" in which they are tested,
thus even in the dispensation of Grace, faith becomes a work which entitles us
to Christ. If one can only muster from the depths of one's heart enough
"faith", one can meet the condition of this dispensation and be
rewarded with salvation.6
Orthodox
Christian doctrine, on the other hand, adamantly teaches that man is dead in
trespasses and sin, cannot improve his condition in the slightest, and that it
is Christ alone who justifies the ungodly. Faith is the gift of God,
through the new birth, a work of the Holy Spirit by Word and Sacrament.
It
is also taught among us that since the fall of Adam all men who are born
according to the course of nature are conceived and born in sin. That is, all
men are full of evil lust and inclinations from their mothers' wombs and are
unable by nature to have true fear of God and true faith in God. Moreover, this
inborn sickness and hereditary sin is truly sin and condemns to the eternal
wrath of God all those who are not born again through Baptism and the Holy
Spirit. Rejected in this connection are the Pelagians and others who deny that
original sin is sin, for they hold that natural man is made righteous by his own
powers, thus disparaging the sufferings and merit of Christ. 7
In
answer to the "Scofield problem" dispensationalism began to redefine
the term "dispensation". The New Scofield Reference Bible of 1967
repeats Scofield's terminology, but the modern commentators elaborate on 1909
version indicating that the definition implies three concepts: a new divine
revelation, the nature of man's stewardship with respect to it, and a certain
time period for it. These implied concepts are then qualified to such an extent
as to make the delineations meaningless. Significantly, this new definition of
dispensations brings into question whether the term means anything at all.
The
purpose of each dispensation, then, is to place man under a specific rule of
conduct, but such stewardship is not a condition of salvation. In every past
dispensation unregenerate man has failed, and he has failed in this present
dispensation and will in the future. But salvation has been and will continue to
be available to him by God's grace through faith.8
Revisionist
dispensationalism now states that the purpose of the dispensations are not
salvific. What, then, is the purpose of the testing in regards to the
"specific rule of conduct"? What is the significance of man's failure
in the various dispensations? It seems that while Scofield might have been too
frank in his elucidation, his successors have so qualified the term
"dispensation" as to remove from it any semblance of meaning. Note
also, that "available to him by God's grace through faith" still
leaves it unclear as to whether "faith" is an innate ability of fallen
man, or is a product of the new birth.
The
central question here is whether dispensational theology recognizes, as does
orthodox Christianity, that regeneration is the source of faith.
Dispensational theology sees the sequence of dispensations as opportunities for
fallen man to attain to God. Though in past dispensations none passed the test,
the opportunity was there - "Do this and live". During the
current dispensation of Grace, the bar has been lowered - all that is required
is "faith". If a man will avail himself of his "chance", and
exercise his own moral ability to believe, he will be entitled to the grace of
God in Christ.
Lewis
Sperry Chafer (1871-1952), a student of Scofield, established Dallas Theological
Seminary in 1924, and led dispensationalism's flagship school for it's first
thirty years. Chafer also produced the first definitive systematic theology of
dispensationalism. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, 8 vols.,
(Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948) is a standard articulation of Scofieldian
dispensational thought. Chafer, always faithful to his mentor, stated - "It
goes on record that the Dallas Theological Seminary uses, recommends, and
defends the Scofield Bible."9
That
the founder of the school known as the "Jerusalem of Dispensationalism",
and the author of her Systematic Theology might make statements such as the
following comes as no surprise to those who understand the grievous error of the
dispensational system.
"With
the call of Abraham and the giving of the Law... there are two widely different
standardized, divine provisions whereby man, who is utterly fallen, might come
into the favor of God."10
Chafer's
Systematic Theology makes the point that in the Old Testament men were justified
by the Law, while in the New Testament faith was without works.11
Again, in his Dispensationalism, p. 430, Chafer makes plain his
misunderstanding of grace -
As
before stated, whatever God does for sinful men on any terms whatsoever [being
made possible through the death of Christ] is to that extent, an act of divine
grace; for whatever God does on the ground of Christ's death is gracious in
character, and all will agree that a divine covenant which is void of all human
elements is more gracious in character than one which is otherwise. These
distinctions apply only to the divine side of the covenant. On the human side...
there is no exercise of grace in any case; but the human requirements which the
divine covenant imposes may be either absolutely lacking, or some so drastically
imposed as to determine the destiny of the individual.
Chafer,
in keeping with the standard definition of a dispensation, sees the Atonement as
making grace possible throughout the various ages, which allows salvation to be
viewed as gracious regardless of the added requirements of that specific
dispensation. So, under Grace (...the human requirements which the divine
covenant imposes may be either absolutely lacking...) if one can generate
the necessary faith one might receive grace. Under the dispensation of Law (...or
some so drastically imposed as to determine the destiny of the individual.),
one might be required to keep the Law.
In
either case, the salvation obtained is gracious (according to Chafer), while in
fact it is salvation by grace in neither. Modern dispensationalists may argue
that what Scofield and Chafer had meant has not been properly discerned from
what they have said. To that we say, look to the Consistent (or Bullingerite)
Dispensationalist who has done nothing other than carry dispensationalism
consistently to it's logical conclusions.
Dispensationalism
believes that the purpose of the first advent of Jesus Christ was to offer an
earthly Kingdom to the Jews. This Kingdom would reinstate the Old Testament
legal system and it's expansion to the entire world under the Messiah. When the
Jews rejected Jesus Christ and His Kingdom offer, plan B went into effect and
Christ went to the cross to initiate the dispensation of Grace and the
"mystery church". Had Israel received her King there would have been
no cross - and no Gospel!
When
Jesus came, He made a bona fide offer of the Kingdom and power to the people of
Israel.12
What
then, if the Jews had done their duty and accepted this offer, of the salvation
of mankind? What of the cross - "without shedding of blood there is
no remission"? What of the prophecies pointing to the cross? How
could Christ offer a Kingdom that He could not permit to be established lest
there be no salvation of man by His shed Blood? Dispensationalists attempt to
absolve themselves from the concept of making God a liar by claiming He knew no
one would call His bluff.
He
knew before He came that they would refuse it - knew from all eternity; hence,
there are prophets which speak of His coming to die for us.13
Still,
the problem stands. Even if Christ made an earthly Kingdom offer knowing that
the Jews would refuse, the offer could not have been redeemed. An offer that is
impossible to honor is not a sincere offer but a fraud. Our God makes no
insincere offers. Besides, if Christ came to establish an earthly Kingdom for
the Jews surely He had opportunity, and the support of the masses -
Therefore
when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force to make
Him king, He departed again to the mountain by Himself alone. -John 6:15
No,
Christ came at the set time to die on the cross, to redeem fallen mankind. All
true sons of Abraham recognized Him. It is at the Ascension that He received His
Kingdom, and He is seated now on His Throne!
Therefore
I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the
saints, do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my
prayers: that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to
you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, the eyes of
your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His
calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and
what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to
the working of His mighty power which He worked in Christ when He raised Him
from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above
all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named,
not only in this age but also in that which is to come. -Eph 1:15-21
Comparing,
then, what is said in Scripture concerning Israel and the Church, we find that
in origin, calling, promises, worship, principles of conduct and future destiny
all is contrast.14
Perhaps
the central doctrine of dispensationalism is the distinction between Israel and
the church. Dispensationalism sees Israel as an earthly people with earthly
promises, and the church as a heavenly people with heavenly promises. Membership
in Israel is by natural birth.15 One
enters the church by supernatural birth. Dispensationalists view Israel and the
church as having distinct eternal destinies. Israel will receive an eternal
earthly Kingdom, and the church an eternal heavenly Kingdom.
Darby,
the father of dispensationalism, stated the distinction in the clearest of terms
"The Jewish nation is never to enter the church."16
Ryrie considers this the most important dispensational distinction, and approves
the statement that the "basic promise of Dispensationalism is two
purposes of God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their
distinction throughout eternity."17
In
contrast, Christian theology has always maintained the essential continuity of
Israel and the church. The elect of all the ages are seen as one people, with
one Savior, one destiny. This continuity can be shown by examining a few Old
Testament prophesies with their fulfillment. Dispensationalists admit that if
the church can be shown to be fulfilling promises made to Israel their system is
doomed.
If
the church is fulfilling Israel's promises as contained in the new covenant or
anywhere in the Scriptures, then [dispensational] premillennialism is condemned.18
Promise
to Israel -
"Yet
the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, Which
cannot be measured or numbered. And it shall come to pass in the place where it
was said to them, 'You are not My people,' There it shall be said to them, 'You
are sons of the living God.' -Hosea 1:10
Fulfillment
in the church -
What
if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much
longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might
make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had
prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but
also of the Gentiles? As He says also in Hosea: "I will call them My
people, who were not My people, And her beloved, who was not beloved."
"And it shall come to pass in the place where it was said to them, 'You are
not My people,' There they shall be called sons of the living God." -Romans
:22-26
Promise
to Israel -
Then
I will sow her for Myself in the earth, And I will have mercy on her who had not
obtained mercy; Then I will say to those who were not My people, 'You are My
people!' And they shall say, 'You are my God!'" -Hosea 2:23
Fulfillment
in the church -
But
you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special
people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness
into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of
God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy. -1 Peter 2:9-10
Promise
to Israel -
"On
that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And
repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of
old; -Amos 9:11
Fulfillment
in the church -
"Simon
has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a
people for His name. "And with this the words of the prophets agree, just
as it is written: 'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of
David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; So
that the rest of mankind may seek the LORD, Even all the Gentiles who are called
by My name, Says the LORD who does all these things.' "Known to God from
eternity are all His works. -Acts 15:14-18
In
the same manner there are many Old Testament passages referring to Israel that
are in the New Testament applied directly to the church.
Spoken
to Israel -
"And
it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh;
Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams,
Your young men shall see visions. And also on My menservants and on My
maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days. "And I will show
wonders in the heavens and in the earth: Blood and fire and pillars of smoke.
The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the
coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD. And it shall come to pass That
whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in
Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant
whom the LORD calls. -Joel 2:28-32
Applied
to the church -
When
the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one
place..."But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 'And it shall
come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on
all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see
visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. And on My menservants and on My
maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy. I
will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire
and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into
blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD. And it shall
come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved.' -Acts
2:1,16-21
Spoken
to Israel -
'And
you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words
which you shall speak to the children of Israel." -Exodus 19:6
Applied
to the church -
But
you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special
people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness
into His marvelous light; -1 Peter 2:9
Spoken
to Israel -
"My
tabernacle also shall be with them; indeed I will be their God, and they shall
be My people. -Ezekiel 37:27
Applied
to the church -
And
what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the
living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them. I
will be their God, And they shall be My people." -2 Cor 6:16
Spoken
to Israel -
"Speak
to all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say to them: 'You shall
be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy. -Lev 19:2
Applied
to the church -
but
as He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, because it
is written, "Be holy, for I am holy." -1 Peter 1:15-16
Spoken
to Israel -
"Behold,
the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the
house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- -Jer 31:31
Applied
to the church -
Likewise
He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in
My blood, which is shed for you. -Luke 22:20
The
New Covenant is particularly problematic for the dispensationalist, as Jeremiah
31 is undeniably addressed to Israel. The New Covenant is the very heart of the
Gospel, yet if the church is fulfilling the promise given to Israel under the
New Covenant, dispensationalism is dead. Ryrie, in his early writings, makes
this significant statement:
If
the church does not have a new covenant, then she is fulfilling Israel's
promises, for it has been clearly shown that the Old Testament teaching on the
new covenant is that it is for Israel. If the church is fulfilling Israel's
promises as contained in the new covenant or anywhere else in the Scriptures,
then [dispensational] premillennialism is condemned. One might well ask why
there are not two aspects to the one new covenant. This is the position held by
many premillennialists, but we agree that the amillennialist has every right to
say of this view that it is a practical admission that the new covenant is
fulfilled in and to the church.19
Dispensationalism
has used various arguments to get around this insurmountable problem. Perhaps
the boldest was the concept of two New Covenants. Chafer appears to be the
originator of the idea:
There
remains to be recognized a heavenly covenant for the heavenly people, which is
also styled like the preceding one for Israel a "new covenant." It is
made in the blood of Christ (cf. Mark 14:24) and continues in effect throughout
this age, whereas the new covenant made with Israel happens to be future in its
application. To suppose that these two covenants -- one for Israel and one for
the Church -- are the same is to assume that there is a latitude of common
interest between God's purpose for Israel and His purpose for the Church.20
Consistent
Dispensationalists have long recognized the problem. E.W. Bullinger noted that
the cup of the Lord's Supper was indeed the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-33,
directed to Israel and not the church, and for that very reason the
"mystery" church should not administer it. Moderate (inconsistent)
dispensationalists, not understanding the Sacrament, but still desiring to
preserve their "memorial" sought to maneuver out of this predicament.
John F. Walvoord, who became the president of Dallas Theological Seminary, and
who appears to be the leading contemporary champion of the second new covenant,
writes:
The
point of view that holds to two covenants in the present age has certain
advantages. It provides a sensible reason for establishing the Lord's supper for
believers in this age in commemoration of the blood of the new covenant. The
language of I Corinthians 11:25 seems to require it: "This cup is the new
covenant in my blood: this do as often as ye drink it in remembrance of
me." It hardly seems reasonable to expect Christians to distinguish between
the cup and the new covenant when these appear to be identified in this passage.
In 2 Corinthians 3:6, Paul speaking of himself states: "Our sufficiency is
of God: who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant." It
would be difficult to adjust the ministry of Paul as a minister of the new
covenant if, in fact, there is no new covenant for the present age. 21
Walvoord,
discussing the Epistle to the Hebrews, contrasts the Mosaic (old) Covenant, the
New Covenant, and his novel "Better" Covenant. The identification of
the New Covenant which replaces the Old Covenant would seem to be certain by the
lengthy quotation from Jeremiah 31 which the Epistle contains, and thus it is
with some astonishment that one reads Walvoord's denial:
The
Epistle to the Hebrews by its title is addressed to the Jewish people. The
epistle is planned to show that Christ and Christian doctrine supersedes Moses
and the Mosaic covenant. The argument in Hebrews eight proceeds on the
revelation that Christ is mediator of a better covenant than Moses, established
on better promises. At this point, the writer shows that the Mosaic covenant was
never intended to be eternal (in contrast to other Jewish covenants) and that
the Old Testament itself anticipated the day of its passing. To prove this
point, the passage from Jeremiah on the new covenant is quoted (Heb.
8:8-12)...There is no appeal at all to the content of the new covenant with
Israel as being identical with the better covenant of which Hebrews speaks. The
very absence of such an appeal is as strong as any argument from silence can be.
22
Dispensationalists,
determined to cling to their false distinction between Israel and the church are
forced to abandon the New Covenant's application in any real sense to the
church. Albertus Pieters, however, representing non-dispensational commentators
in general, explains:
This
is entirely correct [that Israel is meant in Jeremiah 31], and it is to the
house of Israel that the fulfillment came. The objection arises from a failure
to perceive that the Christian church in its origin was an Israelitish body,
full qualified to claim the promises made to Israel.... The Christian church
once having been established many Gentiles came into it, but that did not make
it a "church from among the Gentiles", any more than the
naturalization of many Italians in our country makes it a nation from among the
Italians.... they were all Israelite members of the Old Covenant people of God,
to whom the promise had been made. Strictly in line with the promise and with
the prevailing principle of the covenant history, to them, the believing
remnant, the promise of the New Covenant was fulfilled. That promise was,
"To the House of Israel and the House of Judah," and to the designated
parties the fulfillment came; to all who were, in the sight of God and according
to a just interpretation of history, still worthy of the name: "Israel and
Judah.".... In all this, are we spiritualizing the prophecy as some allege?
Not at all. We are stating a historical fact, clearly contained in the sacred
records, that in or about the spring of the year 30 A.D., the mass of those who
then called themselves Israelites ceased to be such for prophetic and covenant
purpose, having forfeited their citizenship in the commonwealth of Israel by
refusing to accept the Messiah, and that after this event all the privileges of
the Abrahamic Covenant and all the promises of God belonged to the believing
remnant, and to them only; which remnant was therefore and thereafter the true
Israel and Judah, the Seed of Abraham, the Christian church. Thus the promise
was fulfilled strictly and definitely to the designated parties.23
We
have discussed the fact that the dispensationalist's understanding of
"dispensation" invalidates the reality of grace in any age, how the
dispensational "Kingdom Offer" impugns the honesty of God and makes
the gospel nothing more than an afterthought, and how presumed distinctions
between Israel and the church deny the New Covenant to either. We will now
examine how the peculiarly dispensational doctrine of the Pretribulational
Rapture of the Church makes manifest these errors.
The
novel doctrine of the pretribulational rapture is central to dispensational
teaching. The removal of the church to heaven preceding the Tribulation period,
when the stopped prophetic clock begins ticking for Israel again with the
"Seventieth Week of Daniel", was Darby's innovation.
Darby
broke not only from previous millenarian teaching but from all of church history
by asserting that Christ's second coming would occur in two stages. The first,
an invisible "secret rapture" of true believers could happen at any
moment, ending the great "parenthesis" or church age which began when
the Jews rejected Christ. 24
Scofield
also taught this doctrine along with Chafer, Ryrie, Walvoord, etc. At
dispensational schools, failure to hold steadfastly to the doctrine of the
pretribulational rapture may have dire consequences.
...the
doctrine of a pretribulational rapture of the church seems to be a litmus test
of orthodoxy. To "outsiders," including classic premillennialists,
this doctrine is not crucial, if it is believed at all. But not only is it
vigorously maintained in Dallas Dispensationalism, but deviation from it causes
a person to be suspect and institutions to shake and sometimes split.25
It
is unfortunate that "outsiders" - historic premillennialists,
postmillennialists, and amillennialists - have not taken this distinctively
dispensational doctrine more seriously, for it is here that dispensational
theology stands or falls. It is the doctrine of the pretribulational rapture
that proves conclusively that Dispensationalism is not, as dispensationalists
claim, a return to Biblical theology - but a pseudo Christian cult.
Most
arguments against pretribulationism have focused upon showing that the doctrine
is a new development in theology and can not be found in the scriptures. Various
orthodox commentators and theologians, from the ranks of each of the millennial
views26, have presented this case with
considerable skill. We will therefore take a different tack, and show that the
doctrine is in direct opposition to the everlasting Gospel of Christ Jesus.
Most
earlier dispensational theologians allowed that the Old Testament saints would
be resurrected along with the church in the pretribulational rapture. Alexander
Reese, a classic premillennialist, utterly destroyed this position with
convincing scriptural arguments locating the resurrection of the Old Testament
saints at the Day of the Lord at the end of the Tribulation.27
"At
that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the
sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was
since there was a nation, Even to that time. And at that time your people shall
be delivered, Every one who is found written in the book. And many of those who
sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to everlasting life, Some to
shame and everlasting contempt. -Daniel 12:1-2
Although
I heard, I did not understand. Then I said, "My lord, what shall be the end
of these things?" And he said, "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are
closed up and sealed till the time of the end. "Many shall be purified,
made white, and refined, but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the
wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand. "And from the time
that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set
up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. "Blessed is he
who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.
"But you, go your way till the end; for you shall rest, and will arise to
your inheritance at the end of the days." -Daniel 12:8-13
No
dispensationalist would argue that the "time of trouble such as never was
since there was a nation", the "abomination of desolation", and
the taking away of the daily sacrifice is not a reference to the time of the
Tribulation. Yet, Daniel is told that the resurrection follows these events.
Dispensationalists
then, for the most part, amended their position to separate the resurrection of
the Old Testament saints from the rapture.
...
many careful students of premillennial truth have come to the conclusion that
the opinion that Israel's resurrection occurred at the time of the rapture was a
hasty one and without proper Scriptural foundation. It seems far more preferable
to regard the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 as a literal one following the
tribulation, but not to be identified with the pretribulational rapture of the
church... The church will be raised at the time of the rapture before the
tribulation, and the Old Testament saints, including Israel, at the beginning of
the millennial reign of Christ. 28
On
this point the dispensationalist has jumped from the frying pan into the fire.
In order to preserve the precious doctrine of the pretribulational rapture of
the church, they raise the Old Testament saints apart from the saints of the
church age. We note that this is consistent with the dispensational
understanding of "dispensations" and with their distinction between
Israel and the church. It also reveals that the longstanding charge made by
orthodox Christianity that dispensationalism teaches multiple methods of
salvation is absolutely true. Let us look at some of the texts concerning the
resurrection of the saints -
Now
this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;
nor does corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall
not all sleep, but we shall all be changed--in a moment, in the twinkling of an
eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be
raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on
incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible
has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be
brought to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in
victory." "O Death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your
victory?" -1 Cor 15:50-55
For
this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain
until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. For
the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an
archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.
Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the
clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.
-1 Thes 4:15-17
In
these classic dispensational proof texts of the pretribulational rapture, we see
that the righteous dead are raised first, and then those who are alive and
remain are translated into incorruptable bodies and gathered to Christ. How,
then, can the dispensationalist justify the concept of the Old Testament saints
being raised at some later point in time?
Some
people are startled by the thought that the Old Testament saints will not be
resurrected until the end of the Tribulation. But keep in mind that the rapture
is a promise to the Church, and the Church only.29
We
see that the dispensationally imposed distinction between Israel and the church
is at the root of this argument. The Old Testament saints are not "in
Christ" and therefore will not arise to everlasting life at the same time
as the church saints.
According
to dispensationalists, the Old Testament people are not the heirs of the Holy
Spirit, are not regenerated by Him, and are not grafted by Him into Christ in
the same way that the New Testament people are.30
...the
verse simply says that the dead in Christ will precede the living in Christ in
the rapture. If you are saying that Daniel would be included in "the
dead", then you have to show that Daniel is "in Christ". If you
will study the NT you will see that "in Christ" refers to the baptism
in the Holy Spirit. "For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one
body--whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free--and we were all given the one
Spirit to drink"...There is no way that Daniel was part of the body of
Christ. This verse in 1 Thess 4:16 simply does not apply to him. The Holy Spirit
did not permanently indwell believers in the OT. It is not really people or time
period that delineates the church--it is the Holy Spirit. Personal faith in
Jesus Christ--which is what the passage is referring to--was not an option for
OT saints. They are not in view in this passage. It is referring to people who
do have the option of this personal faith in Jesus...OT saints are "in
Christ" in that sense that the death of Jesus is the basis for the
salvation of anyone--past, present, future. However, they were not part of the
body of Christ, in the sense of being permanently indwelt by the Holy Spirit. 31
The
technical term for the Church is those who are "in Christ." 1 Thess.
speaks of those who have died "in Christ" being resurrected at the
time of His coming IN THE AIR. The context has ONLY the Church in mind. 32
This
dispensational distinction between the OT & NT saints, the church &
Israel, is in fact what denies dispensationalism any claim to Christianity at
all, for in that very distinction dispensationalism teaches multiple methods of
salvation. By excluding the OT saint from the ekklesia (church) the
dispensationalist is required to produce some means, other than partaking of the
New Covenant in Christ, for one or the other of the groups to be granted eternal
life. The teaching of the church for the last 2,000 yrs precludes this, as does
our Lord.
Then
Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh
of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My
flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last
day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He who eats My
flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. " - John 6:53-56 33
Notice
these points which contradict Dispensational doctrine -
"But
you, go your way till the end; for you shall rest, and will arise to your
inheritance at the end of the days."- Daniel 12:13
And
for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for
the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who
are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. -Hebrews 9:15
By
faith he dwelt in the land of promise as in a foreign country, dwelling in tents
with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; for he waited for
the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God. -Hebrews 11:9-10
These
all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar
off were assured of them, embraced them and confessed that they were strangers
and pilgrims on the earth...But now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly
country. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has
prepared a city for them. -Hebrews 11:13,16
And
all these, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the
promise, God having provided something better for us, that they should not be
made perfect apart from us. -Hebrews 11:39-40
The
dispensationalist, ignoring the clear teaching of scripture and the historic
church, denies the existence of the general assembly, and falls back to
perdition by advocating shadows as the means of salvation for the OT &
Tribulation saint, all in order to preserve the delusion of the pretribulational
rapture!
But
you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly
Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and
church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all,
to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new
covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of
Abel. See that you do not refuse Him who speaks. For if they did not escape who
refused Him who spoke on earth, much more shall we not escape if we turn away
from Him who speaks from heaven, whose voice then shook the earth; but now He
has promised, saying, "Yet once more I shake not only the earth, but also
heaven." Now this, "Yet once more," indicates the removal of
those things that are being shaken, as of things that are made, that the things
which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom
which cannot be shaken, let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably
with reverence and godly fear. For our God is a consuming fire. -Hebrews
12:22-29
The
dispensational argument that proclaims that the OT saint is somehow saved
because of Christ - rather than being "in Christ" by partaking of the
New Covenant in His Blood - is opposed to orthodox Christian soteriology.
The
truth will inevitably manifest itself. It has in dispensational soteriology. The
truth is that another way of salvation which is somehow connected with Christ
but not resting on Christ is a DIFFERENT way. The dispensationalist at this
point is, unconsciously perhaps, consistent with himself. He does not regard the
Old Testament people of God as second, third, or fourth class citizens of the
Kingdom of God. They simply are not citizens at all. While dispensationalists
roundly assert that Old Testament people were saved by Christ, there is NO WAY
IN THEIR THEOLOGICAL SYSTEM they could be.34
If
the dispensationalist will simply answer these honestly presented queries, we
will be able to discern whether the accusations against dispensationalism are
true -
1.
Has the OT saint partaken of the blood of Christ shed for sins?
Then
Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh
of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My
flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last
day." -John 6:53-54
And
as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the
disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." Then He took the
cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of
you. For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the
remission of sins." -Matthew 26:26-28
2.
Does the Spirit of Christ dwell in the OT saint?
"He
who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him." -John
6:56
But
you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells
in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. -Romans
8:9
3.
Are ALL the saints of ALL the ages ONE BODY, drinking of the SAME Spirit?
The
cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?
The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we,
though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.
-1 Cor 10:16-17
For
by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks,
whether slaves or free--and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. -1 Cor
12:13
If
one answers in the affirmative the above queries, one has abandoned
Dispensationalism. Congratulations, brother, welcome to orthodox Christianity!
If one answers any of the above in the negative, then the accusations against
dispensationalism are true, and we would ask that person to produce the means of
the OT saints salvation!
1.
Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today (Chicago: Moody Press, 1965),
41-45
2.
Darby introduced into discussion at Powerscourt (1833) the ideas of a
secret rapture of the church and of a parenthesis in prophetic fulfillment
between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel. These two concepts
constituted the basic tenets of the system of theology since referred to as
dispensationalism... E.R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism 1800-1930
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970)
3.
The End Times: A
Study on Eschatology and Millennialism,
A Report of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations LCMS, Sept. 1989,
p.3
4.
C.I. Scofield, Scofield Reference Bible, 1909,1917(notes on John
1:17 sec.2) p.1115
5.
Ibid., p.5
6.
Though claiming Calvinist roots, on this point the dispensationalist
apparently agrees with Zwingli and Pelagius rather than Calvin or Luther
7.
The Augsburg Confession, Article II [ Original Sin ]
8.
New Scofield
Reference Bible, p.3
9.
Quoted in Jon Zens, Dispensationalism, p.12
10.
L.S. Chafer, "Dispensationalism," Bibliotheca Sacra 93
(1936):93
11.
L.S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, 7:219
12.
D.G. Barnhouse, He Came Unto His Own (New York: Revell, 1933),
p.17
13.
Ibid.
14.
Scofield, "Scofield Bible Correspondence Course", pp. 23-25,
cited in Zens, Dispensationalism, p.17
15.
Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, pp.137-140
16.
J.N. Darby, The Hopes of the Church of God (London: G. Morrish,
n.d.), p.106
17.
Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, pp.44-45
18.
Ryrie, THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE NEW COVENANT TO PREMILLENNIALISM
(unpublished Master's thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary 1947), p. 31
19.
Ibid.
20.
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, VII, 98.
21.
Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom, p. 218.
22.
John F. Walvoord, "The New Covenant With Israel," Bibliotheca
Sacra, 103:24, 25, January, 1946.
23.
Albertus Pieters, The Seed of Abraham, p. 71-76
24.
W.A. Hoffecker, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, "Darby, John
Nelson," pp. 292-3.
25.
John H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of
Dispensationalism (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), 47.
26.
Alexander Reese (premill.), O.T. Allis (amill.), W.E. Cox (amill.), Greg
Bahnsen & Kenneth Gentry (postmill.) are notable among others
27.
Alexander Reese, The Approaching Advent of Christ (Marshall,
Morgan and Scott, London, 1937; reprint, Grand Rapids MI: Grand Rapids
International Publications, 1975), 328 p.
28.
John F. Walvoord, Israel in Prophesy (1962; reprint, Grand
Rapids MI: Zondervan, 1977), 116, 118.
29.
David R. Reagan, The Master Plan: Making Sense of the Controversies
Surrounding Bible Prophecy Today (Eugene OR: Harvest House, 1993), 123.
30.
John H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of
Dispensationalism (Brentwood TN:Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), 206.
31.
"Resurrection Apart from Christ?" Bill Barton, Armageddon,
FamilyNet, 10/21/93.
32.
"Rapture," Gary Nystrom, Armageddon, FamilyNet, 5/28/94.
33.
Here we also note the grievous error of many Christians in viewing the
Lord's Supper as a memorial rather than the Sacrament that it is.
34.
John H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of
Dispensationalism (Brentwood TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), 169.
35.
E.W. Bullinger, Foundations of Dispensational Truth (London: Eyre and
Spottiswood, 1931), 34.
36.
Ibid., p.219.
37.
Harry Ironside, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth (New York: Loizeaux,
n.d.), 11.
38.
John H. Gerstner, Wrongly
Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism (Brentwood
TN:Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), 204-5.
The
distinctive doctrines of dispensationalism have been most consistently taught by
a movement variously identified as Hyperdispensationalism,
Ultradispensationalism, Consistent dispensationalism or Bullingerism. The
movement had its origin in the teaching of Ethelbert W. Bullinger. Bullinger was
a descendant of Heinrich Bullinger, the successor of Zwingli. Bullinger's
teaching separated Israel and the church even more radically than Darby or
Scofield, placing the beginning of the church with the imprisonment of Paul in
Rome.
There
was no beginning of a church on that day of Pentecost. 35
This
positive statement that Paul was not only confirming the word which "began
to be spoken by the Lord"; but that, like the Lord's own ministry, Paul's
was based entirely on the Old Testament prophetic Scriptures, "Moses and
the Prophets." From this it is conclusive that there can be no Dispensation
of the Church in Acts of the Apostles, and certainly no revelation of the
mystery (or Secret) as subsequently made known in the later epistles written
from his prison in Rome. 36
This
doctrine does amazing things with the application of Scripture to the church.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John describe the preaching of the "gospel of the
Kingdom" and have no direct application to the church. The period between
the cross of Christ and the end of the Acts of the Apostles is the realm of the
Hebrew Church, as distinguished from the "mystery" church to which
Paul's prison epistles are addressed.
During
this transitional period the "gospel of the Kingdom" which Christ had
offered to the Jews was still in effect. Peter, James, Jude, Hebrews, and the
epistles of John are all addressed to this Hebrew Church, which is not the
"body of Christ" but a church "built on Christ". This Jewish
Church, built on Kingdom promises, will be reestablished during the millennium,
and will worship at the rebuilt Temple with atoning sacrifices.
The
"mystery" church has only the prison epistles of Paul for doctrine.
The sacraments of Holy Baptism and the Lord's Supper, having been instituted
before the revelation of the "mystery" church are relegated to the old
dispensation, although they may have application to the tribulation saints. The
"mystery" church needs no "mediator of the New Covenant" as
it is the "body" - it IS Christ. Some Bullingerites have taken up
heresies such as soul sleep and annihilationism, and others proclaim a brand of
universalism that grants salvation even to Satan himself. The extent to which
the Hyperdispensationalist has gone with Darby's doctrine has shocked even the
dispensational faithful. Harry Ironside, one of dispensationalism's stalwarts,
states -
Having
had most intimate acquaintance with Bullingerism as taught by many for the last
forty years, I have no hesitancy in saying that its fruits are evil. It has
produced a tremendous crop of heresies throughout the length and breadth of this
and other lands; it has divided Christians and wrecked churches and assemblies
without number; it has lifted up its votaries in intellectual and spiritual
pride to an appalling extent, so that they look with supreme contempt upon
Christians who do not accept their peculiar views; and in most instances where
it has been long tolerated, it has absolutely throttled Gospel effort at home
and sown discord on missionary fields abroad. So true are these things of this
system that I have no hesitancy in saying it is an absolutely Satanic perversion
of the truth. 37
Bullinger's
schemes show the weaknesses in traditional dispensational interpretation, and
set out to solve them with consistent dispensational application. Bullinger was
one of the first to admit that the Old Testament saints were to arise at the end
of the tribulation, and came up with a program of multiple resurrections. Most
dispensationalists see the gospel of Matthew as a Jewish book with the Jews in
mind in the apocalyptic chapters 24 & 25, yet wish to preserve the Great
Commission as applicable to the church. Consistent dispensationalists assign the
Commission to a future Jewish remnant church.
Thus
we see that the ultradispensationalists go to the end of the dispensational line
while the more moderate dispensationalists, at the cost of consistency, try to
get off at midpoint. Both varieties of dispensationalists believe that there is
a qualitative difference between Israel and the church...The moral of all this
for the Scofieldian dispensationalist is that if he will not build on the
covenantal continuity of the earlier dispensations, there is simply no way by
which he can make room for the church at a later stage. The
ultradispensationalist has been pointing this out for a century. Covenant
theologians have been showing it for millennia. 38
The
Bullingerite stands with arms outstretched to welcome the moderate
dispensationalist. All that is required is to apply the dispensational system
consistently.
Amillennialism
The
view that there will be no (a) 1000 (mille) year visible
earthly kingdom or "millennium." This view is better termed
"realized millennialism" since it teaches that the symbolically
understood 1000 years of Revelation 20 began at Christ's first advent.
Antichrist
The
apostle John is the only Biblical writer who uses the expression
"antichrist" and applies the term in a general sense to many who
oppose or seek to replace Christ. Martin Luther referred to the Pope and various
unbiblical doctrines of the Roman Church as antichrist in this sense. The
concept of one individual, who epitomizes evil and in the end times persecutes
the people of God, is found throughout the apocalyptic writings
Armageddon
Derived
from Hebrew har megiddo, "the hill of Megiddo," in Palestine,
Armageddon refers to the battle mentioned in Rev. 16:16.
Bullingerites
Followers
of Ethelbert W. Bullinger who carry dispensational theology consistently to it's
logical conclusions. Also called "Hyper", "Ultra", or
"Consistent" Dispensationalists.
Chiliasm
See
"millennialism"
Dispensationalism
Also
called dispensational premillennialism, this is a system of theology which
divides history into distinct dispensations or periods of time in which God
gives a specific revelation and man is tested with respect to his obedience of
it. All dispensationalists are premillennialists, but not all premillennialists
are dispensationalists.
Eschatology
Derived
from the Greek word eschaton, "end," eschatology is the study
of the end times. Eschatological means "pertaining to the end."
Millennialism
Derived
from the Latin words mille, "a thousand," and annus,
"a year" (Revelation 20), millennialism teaches that there will be a
1000-year, possible kingdom of God on earth. It is also called chiliasm from the
Greek word chilia, "a thousand."
New
Covenant
The
covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34, which Christ sealed with His Blood at Calvary.
(Heb. 8:6-13, Heb. 9:11-15, St. Luke 22:19-20) Some dispensationalists
distinguish between an earthly new covenant pertaining only to Jews, and a
spiritual "better" covenant pertaining only to saints of the church
age (Walvoord). Other dispensationalists (Bullingerites) deny any application of
the New Covenant to the church.
Orthodox
Conforming
to the Christian faith as formulated in the early ecumenical creeds and
confessions.
Postmillennialism
This
is the view that Christ's second advent will occur after (post) the
"millennium," understood as a golden age on earth but not necessarily
lasting 1000 years.
Premillennialism
This
is the view that Christ's second advent will occur before (pre) the
"millennium," understood as a 1000-year rule of Christ on earth.
Rapture
This
refers to the event described in 1 Thess. 4: 14-17 when believers will be "raptured"
or "caught up" (Latin: rapiemur) in the clouds to meet Christ
in the air. The "pre-tribulational rapture" view holds that the
rapture will occur before a seven-year tribulation; the "mid-tribulational
rapture" view places the rapture in the middle of a seven-year tribulation;
the "post-tribulational" view holds that the rapture will occur after
the tribulation.
Soteriology
In
theology, the doctrine of salvation.
Systematic
Theology
A
constructive method of theology which aims at a complete, philosophic, and
systematic statement of the entire sum of theological knowledge.
Theology
[from
the Gr. theologia; theos, god, and logos, discourse]
The study of God and the relations between God and the universe; the study of
religious doctrines and matters of divinity.
Tribulation
This
refers to the intensified persecution against God's people preceding Christ's
second advent. Dispensationalists understand it as a seven-year persecution
against the Jewish nation, while amillennialists see it as a persecution of
unknown duration against the church.