Supersessionism Rising: Dispensationalism...? Part 2
Republished, with permission, from Voice magazine, Sept./Oct 2011.
Part 1 concluded with the observation that many young evangelicals in colleges and universities have decided eschatology is not very important and that many lay people share that opinion.
Scholarly embarrassment?
Furthermore, and perhaps this is in part the cause of the point just made, it is my impression that Christian scholars, even the biblical scholars and evangelical theologians, are not all that interested in pursuing issues related to eschatology or even in advocating a particular position on eschatology. This is becoming more pervasive among premillennial dispensationalists. This may be (and I think it is) caused by the embarrassment that many of them feel when rubbing elbows with the wider scholarly evangelical community. It is something of a long-standing fact of scholarly life (nearly a “tradition”) that when one enters the “serious academy,” matters of eschatology are relegated to relative insignificance.1
One could recount dozens of testimonies of scholars who grew up in or were saved in churches that regarded the New Scofield Reference Bible with the highest esteem, churches that held Prophecy Conferences regularly if not annually, churches whose libraries were well stocked with the books of Chafer, Walvoord, Ryrie, Pentecost, McClain, Feinberg and the other luminaries of classic dispensationalism. But when those young scholars went off to graduate school or seminary (even evangelical seminaries) they were disabused of those resources and enlightened to the profundities of Ladd, Dodd, Bruce, Barr, and Barth (!)…and these days James Dunn and N. T. Wright among others.
As an illustration I would offer the example of the book 20th Century Theology by Stanley J. Grenz and Roger E. Olsen.2 In many ways this is a fine piece of historical theology. And while no survey can cover everything, yet in that book none of the “old Dallas Seminary” authors are even mentioned and the subject of eschatology appears in only one index reference and that’s under the theology of Rudolph Bultmann! The message is clear: “scholarly theology” is simply not interested in the timing of the Rapture or the future of ethnic Israel.3
Resurgence of reformed theology
Also, there has recently been a resurgence of Reformed theology among a broader range of evangelicals. The rise of Reformed theology (Westminster Confession of Faith type of Reformed), especially among the so-called “young restless and reformed”4 has generally and in some cases specifically had a deleterious effect on the study of eschatology. And more to the point, it has contributed to a movement away from premillennial dispensationalism toward a murky amillennial covenantalism.5 Popular preachers in that mode like John Piper6 (not so young but very popular with the young, restless and reformed men), Mark Driscoll,7 Kevin DeYoung8 and others as well as Reformed bloggers like Tim Challies9 have been on record as discounting prophetic themes while pushing a Westminster Confession of Faith/Reformed point of view that is inherently supersessionist. My point is that many of our young people, influenced by the popularity of the preachers and bloggers noted above, are becoming supersessionist almost without thinking. And this is happening even if they will somewhere in their theology affirm a form of premillennialism.
Spiritual vision eschatology
Next is the pervasiveness of what Blaising himself calls a spiritual-vision eschatology. This he defines as a “traditional eschatology which sees eternal life as a timeless, changeless, spiritual existence consisting primarily in the human soul’s full knowledge of God…. This is the sum total of what eternal life is, and it defines what is meant by heaven.”10 In short, the sum total of the eschatology of many Christians is this simple phrase: “absent from the body, present with the Lord.” For many Christians (and many of them in our own churches) this simple formula entails all that one needs to know about eschatology. And this fits well with the vision of supersessionism.
According to this view, everything in this life is “a symbol of spiritual realities” so “Israel can only be a symbol of a spiritual people to come.”11 In this view, one can easily turn the Old Testament land promises to Abraham and his seed into “spiritual promises.” They fit into a spiritual-vision eschatology. But viewing the land promises as promises that are to be literally fulfilled seem less than credible (or even pertinent) to a simple eschatology defined as “going to be with the Lord” at one’s death and nothing more. The very earthly (to be fulfilled literally “on the very ground”) and temporal (in time and space) eschatology of dispensational premillennialism seems less credible to many believers than the vision of this pervasive “spiritual-vision” eschatology. The latter is simple and satisfying, the former (dispensational eschatology) seems complicated. And in the end, they ask “who’s going to care about the Antichrist when they are with Jesus?”
The lack in our pulpits
Finally, it seems to me that behind much of the uncertainty of dispensationalism in the pew and the classroom stems from the fact that doctrine in general and eschatology in particular is not being taught in the churches or preached from the pulpits. I realize this may seem a wild generalization. But the penchant for relevance in preaching and the cry for practical instruction in the church has pushed doctrinal study to the periphery in many churches. I see it in the incoming students even in Bible college. Doctrine is often viewed as dry and unrelated to life; and that seems especial ly so when the doctrine concerns matters like the tribulation and the millennial kingdom. Besides, these matters are controversial and seem to generate more heat than light and the post-modern student looking for cultural and practical relevance and the entrepreneurial pastor seeking to grow his church soon learn to avoid such matters.12
Implications of all this
All in all, I may be wrong on this and I deeply hope I am. But I’m afraid that premillennial dispensationalism is on the wane, and not because there are better arguments for other millennial views, or for supersessionism. I think this is because the scholars have decided there have been enough arguments over eschatology and that one’s view of the millennium is, well, inconsequential and that to advocate a particular view is in poor scholarly taste. And students are looking for cultural acceptance more than theological precision because they think this is a better way to reach the world with the gospel. The effect of such trends, I fear, is simply to cede ground to views that are by default supersessionist.
Why does this matter? For one consequential matter is Jewish evangelism. It is much more likely for those who believe Scripture teaches a future for nation al Israel will be involved in ministries devoted to Jewish evangelism. It should be a concern for all of us who understand the Scriptural priority of Jewish evangelism to see that the theological tradition that has nurtured much of the impetuous for Jewish evangelism is healthy. One author made the telling observation that there are few staunchly Reformed organizations devoted to reaching the Jewish people.
But even more widely, we should be concerned because the truth we affirm from the Scriptures is in danger of being lost not in the rigors of theological debate and a progressively clearer understanding of the program and plan of God revealed in His Word. It is in danger of being marginalized by those who dismiss it while at the same time it wanes from lack of affirmation, advocacy and teaching by those who formally affirm it. It is one thing for our churches and students to be drawn away by advocates of other eschatological viewpoints. But it is another thing to allow them to drift away by our relative neglect. At the present time both developments are taking place.
Conclusion
Perhaps the optimists are right and supersessionism will not overtake the more Scriptural view that God indeed has a future for ethnic, national Israel. But even if they are right, it is appropriate for us to consider the challenges I have mentioned carefully and to address them boldly and confidently.
How then must we respond? The prescription is, I think very simple to state but will take some determined effort if there is to be a reversal of these trends.
Those who are undecided and on the fence regarding eschatological matters need to get off the fence! Study and show yourself approved! I’m confident that a serious of study of eschatology, looking at both sides and reading both covenant theologians and dispensational authors (such as those books mentioned above) will lead you to a firm conviction of dispensational eschatology.
Also, we educators need to teach this to our students and we pastors need to preach this to our flocks. The trends noted have not risen over night and will not be easily reversed—but they are reversible. If IFCA International does not stand for dispensational theology, who will?
Notes
1 See for instance (and this is only one) the testimony of Richard S. Hess, in his chapter, “The Future Written in the Past: The Old Testament and the Millennium,” in Blomberg and Chung, eds., A Case For Historic Premillennialism (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), pp. 23-24. Hess writes, “Several experiences in my life moved me away from this fascination with, and focus on, the details of Christ’s return.” “The ensuing years occupied me with the study of the Hebrew Bible in its original context and kept me safely away from the prophecy wars in evangelicalism.” The message is clear: serious scholars are not interested in the details of prophecy—they have “matured” beyond such a “fascination.”
2 Stanley J. Grenz and Roger E. Olsen, 20th Century Theology (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1992)
3 Another indication of the lack of scholarly interest in these matters is the rather lack-luster attendance at the Dispensational Study Group at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society. This is purely anecdotal but it has appeared to me that while overall attendance at the ETS meeting has grown over the last few years, attendance at the meetings of the Dispensational Study Group has dwindled.
4 Cf. Colin Hansen, “Young, Restless and Reformed,” Christianity Today, September 22, 2006; http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/september/42.32.html; accessed march 22, 2011; see also Colin Hansen, “Reflections on Young Restless and Reformed,” Reformation 21, February 2009 http://www.reformation21.org/articles/reflections-on-young-restless-and-reformed.php accessed March 22, 2011.
5 A popular website resource for the “young, restless and reformed” is http://www.monergism.com/; this site is decidedly anti-dispensational and pro-covenant theology. However, it has many good and useful sources for other aspects of Bible and theological study.
6 See http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/articles/what-does-john-piper-believe-about-dispensationalism- covenant-theology-and-new-covenant-theology; this page indicates that Piper “is probably the furthest away from dispensationalism, although he does agree with dispensationalism that there will be a millennium.” I would conclude that Piper holds to a form of “historic premillenialism.”
7 http://www.marshillchurch.org/markdriscoll
8 http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/about/; DeYoung’s tag line is “DeYoung, Restless and Reformed.”
9 http://www.challies.com/; Challies clearly does not accept dispensationalism but periodically it comes up on his blog and he is a fair critic.
10 Blaising, “The Future of Israel,” 119. 25.
11 Blaising, “The Future of Israel,” 119.
12 For more on this point see John MacArthur, Ashamed of the Gospel, (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 3rd edition, 2010).
Dr. Kevin D. Zuber is Professor of Theology at Moodly Bible Institute and Pastor of Grace Bible Church Northwest.
I do not see dispensationalism dying, but it is declining. A few years back, churches with Reformed theology were in decline, but that has made a comeback. Part of it, as hinted in posts commenting on part one, is that people do not want to hear eschatology. I think this is caused by several things:
1. The relevance movement. Many believers must see a direct link between a text and their daily lives. It is hard to draw that link as you go through Revelation, plague by plague. New applications just aren’t there.
Whether spoken or quietly thought, many Christians really have the “what do I need this for” attitude toward prophecy. Although prophecy officianados sometimes can be lacking balance, the curiosity motivation is weak in many lives. The value of learning Scripture to learn Scripture (even apart from interpretational issues) is becoming a hard sell. Many Christians think the only reason to learn is to DO, a misunderstanding of James’ teaching. James doesn’t discourage learning, just not learning alone without doing. In the minds of many modern Christians, the ONLY reason to learn is to do. This is sad, for it denies the sanctifying power of the word and spiritual truth. Still, that’s how it is in many instances. So what do you DO with prophecy/
2. Diversity of opinion. Our churches are filled with people who are all over the map when it comes to eschatology. So we are careful not to put too much emphasis there.
3. Hesitancy to Engage in Deep Thinking. It takes concentration and you have to learn some big words to do theology right. Fewer modern minds have the patience or determination to learn the complexities of any scheme of eschatology. Some do, but many do not. This ties in with number one.
4. Antisemitism. Antisemitism can take many forms, one of them refusing to be open to the natural, literal interpretation of God’s promises to Israel. Thus it is tempting to do a “drop in” with those promises, much like day-age theory people do with the “thousand years are as a day” with the days of creation.
I think it is interesting that Mark S. Kinzer, in Post-Missionary Messianic Judaism, pp. 226-233 suggests that Roman Catholics (among others) are becoming more open to a special connection to ethnic Israel.
The bottom line: The percentage of Christians (like myself) who view Israel as God’s special nation and believe that God will exalt Israel in the Millennium wax and wane. Right now, things are waning. The future is… the future. Flux is constant.
What is sad, though, is characterizing Dispensationalists as Biblical idiots. I saw an email the other day listing names of covenant theologians compared to dispensational ones. They had the big guns on the covenant side, but the dispensational list were made up mostly of broadcasting personalities (TV or radio preachers). They left off Ryrie, Unger, Pentecost, Feniberg, Showers, Benware, Walvoord, Wood, Chafer, etc. The most scholarly representative they had was MacArthur. When I see the straw man thing, I am completely soured on the ethics of those who propagate such propaganda.
"The Midrash Detective"
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
Are there enough people representing these viewpoints that can produce some new works? I think dispensationalists can produce some works on Revelation that can add to what is already out there. There is also much in the major prophets that authors such as Feinberg have started to explore that would be a blessing.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
[Charlie] The diminution of dispensational theology is inevitable: it’s a sign of the end times.Inevitable, Charlie? I would say that it is inevitable that the inevitable isn’t. Okay, maybe double-talk is my thing!
"The Midrash Detective"
Mike Vlach at the Masters Seminary has written a great book about the various kinds of supersessionism. He sees 3 kinds historically.
It ultimately comes down to whether or not God lies. Covenantalists say He doesn’t but make Him because of what they do with promises.
Some might say that Israel got all the land promised to them because of a passage in Joshua. While that sounds nice, Jeremiah promised hundreds of years after Solomon that the NC was coming and that it had specific geographic points.
Also, nonDispy advocates would do well to read: http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2006/11/twenty-five-stupid-reasons-for-dissi… Stupid reasons to reject Dispensationalism.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
He says: “It is much more likely for those who believe Scripture teaches a future for nation al Israel will be involved in ministries devoted to Jewish evangelism. It should be a concern for all of us who understand the Scriptural priority of Jewish evangelism to see that the theological tradition that has nurtured much of the impetuous for Jewish evangelism is healthy.”
Why not just evangelism, regardless of ethnicity? Certainly there may be different stategies for JE and there are fine organizations committed to it. But I fail to see a connection between a future for the nation of Israel and present day JE. I don’t follow how trying to reach more Jews today is affected by what God might do in the future or vice-versa. I also fail to see a “Scriptural priority of Jewish evangelism.” This was part of Pau’ls strategy – “to the Jew first.” And John tells us that Jesus “came unto His own and his own received Him not.” How does this become a “Scriptural priority” for the church and how is that implemented? Jesus told us to “make disciples of all nations.” This is the priority.
I do think the author is correct that dispensationalism is on the wane. Statements like the author’s above may well contribute to that decline.
Steve Davis
Hoping to shed more light than heat..
If he raptures out the believers and deals with Israel, fantastic. I dodge the trib. If he allows his assembled elect to roll through the trib, fantastic. He’s in charge and we’ll witness some crazy stuff. If he does something halfway between, or a little bit later, i am not concerned. He’s going to get His eternal will accomplished. Personally i’ve thought about, prayed through & studied several end times positions. I know why i believe the theological position i’ve assumed. if i don’t adopt a dispensational pre-trib rapture, that’s not for relevance, or entrepreneurial church growth. It’s because the bible seems to point in a different direction.
Acts 1:7-8 give us the perspective to adopt. Details of return - not important. Certainty of return - infinitely important.
The NT authors build upon OT expectation. If you don’t understand that expectation, you don’t understand all that Jesus did and will do. You have essentially reduced so much of the NT to irrelevance.
Jesus died for people. All you need to know. The details are not important.
Jesus set up a church. All you need to know. The details are not important.
The problem you face is that the Bible was specific about prophecies literally fulfilled in Christ’s first coming so much so that He rebuked the people who didn’t believe that they completely missed him. They knew he was coming, but they didn’t understand the details.
By the way, the perspective of Acts 1:7-8 was that Christ is going to restore the kingdom to Israel.
I would argue that the reformed community has treated eschatology like an unwanted child for so long that any serious attempts to get into are shunned. The attitude of Paul after considering the plan of God in Rom 9-11 was that He should be praised for His remarkable wisdom. When you cut eschatology down, you cut at the plan of God and miss out on a true, Christ exalting worship of what God did and will do.
The article is about supersessionism. There is no question that the “church” has had an extreme, anti-Christ, anti-Pauline message about Israel throughout its history. The reformers essentially adopted the same, reckless approach to Israel that the Catholics did. So if you are really concerned about the church, you won’t make God a liar.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
[James K] Imagine the audacity to actually say that details of the Bible are not important. On what authority do you say that and on what authority do you only pick eschatology as mostly unimportant?Imagine the audacity of going beyond Scripture in elevating interpretation to a level of certitude in spite of centuries of disagreement. Imagine the audacity of making out others to be liars because they don’t hold to your interpretation.
The NT authors build upon OT expectation. If you don’t understand that expectation, you don’t understand all that Jesus did and will do. You have essentially reduced so much of the NT to irrelevance.
Jesus died for people. All you need to know. The details are not important.
Jesus set up a church. All you need to know. The details are not important.
The problem you face is that the Bible was specific about prophecies literally fulfilled in Christ’s first coming so much so that He rebuked the people who didn’t believe that they completely missed him. They knew he was coming, but they didn’t understand the details.
By the way, the perspective of Acts 1:7-8 was that Christ is going to restore the kingdom to Israel.
I would argue that the reformed community has treated eschatology like an unwanted child for so long that any serious attempts to get into are shunned. The attitude of Paul after considering the plan of God in Rom 9-11 was that He should be praised for His remarkable wisdom. When you cut eschatology down, you cut at the plan of God and miss out on a true, Christ exalting worship of what God did and will do.
The article is about supersessionism. There is no question that the “church” has had an extreme, anti-Christ, anti-Pauline message about Israel throughout its history. The reformers essentially adopted the same, reckless approach to Israel that the Catholics did. So if you are really concerned about the church, you won’t make God a liar.
BTW, details about what we do know from historical fact (Christ’s death, Church) are certainly more clear than what has not yet transpired and is often presented with imagery that confounds the keenness interpreters.
Steve Davis
By the way, people can and do say your exact objection against the doctrines of Christ and the Church.
They aren’t liars because they don’t hold to my interpretation. They make God to be a liar by saying that He goes against His word.
I hope that helps.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
[James K] Imagine the audacity to actually say that details of the Bible are not important. On what authority do you say that and on what authority do you only pick eschatology as mostly unimportant?James, i see this got in your crawl. you’ll note, i never said details of the Bible were unimportant. So your whole premise is an incorrect rush to judgment. What I said was that a lot of folk don’t care about precise details of the end times. And i don’t. i look forward to the return. that’s the biblical exhortation. I have my eschatological position worked out. I preach that Jesus can return at any time. It’s just not in a dispensational format.
The NT authors build upon OT expectation. If you don’t understand that expectation, you don’t understand all that Jesus did and will do. You have essentially reduced so much of the NT to irrelevance.
Jesus died for people. All you need to know. The details are not important.
Jesus set up a church. All you need to know. The details are not important.
The problem you face is that the Bible was specific about prophecies literally fulfilled in Christ’s first coming so much so that He rebuked the people who didn’t believe that they completely missed him. They knew he was coming, but they didn’t understand the details.
By the way, the perspective of Acts 1:7-8 was that Christ is going to restore the kingdom to Israel.
I would argue that the reformed community has treated eschatology like an unwanted child for so long that any serious attempts to get into are shunned. The attitude of Paul after considering the plan of God in Rom 9-11 was that He should be praised for His remarkable wisdom. When you cut eschatology down, you cut at the plan of God and miss out on a true, Christ exalting worship of what God did and will do.
The article is about supersessionism. There is no question that the “church” has had an extreme, anti-Christ, anti-Pauline message about Israel throughout its history. The reformers essentially adopted the same, reckless approach to Israel that the Catholics did. So if you are really concerned about the church, you won’t make God a liar.
different doctrines carry greater weight of impact on our thinking as it relates to other doctrines and Christian life. Authority of Scripture, Deity of Christ, justification by faith certainly trump the timing of the tribulation. my point is not so much that there are major & minor doctrines, it’s the blatant error of this insistence by some, including yourself, that to not be dispensational or raise eschatology like a flag to be vigorously waved, is to be theologically inaccurate. Somehow if i don’t agree with your interpretative notions, i’ve given no thought to the scriptures and made the NT irrelevant. You say i’ve cut at the plan of God, but again, you jumped to misguided conclusions, then buttressed them with some illogical and sloppy generalizations about the atonement and the church.
We can disagree on a theological viewpoint, but it is audacious to claim scriptural high ground simply because i don’t draw the same conclusion you do. and as to me “making God a liar”…..really?
[James K] Steve, what did I say that is beyond Scripture? I don’t believe 25% of the Bible was written so that we could be agnostic and uncaring about it. Maybe you do.Maybe I do what? Am I agnostic and uncaring about 25% of the Bible? Are you serious? People can say anything but you ascribe this in such a general way as to make your charge meaningless. Does someone make God a liar if they do not hold to a pre-trib rapture or restoration of Israel? That’s what I understand you saying. Correct me if I’m wrong. It does sound like disagreeing with you and with God in these areas are the same.
By the way, people can and do say your exact objection against the doctrines of Christ and the Church.
They aren’t liars because they don’t hold to my interpretation. They make God to be a liar by saying that He goes against His word.
I hope that helps.
Jesus is coming again as He promised. He will reign forever and ever in a new heaven and new earth. Whether His coming is in two phases or pre, mid, or post-trib, whether there is an ingathering of Israel at that time or if Jewish people are being added to God’s people now, whether the eternal reign is preceded by an initial 1000 year reign - these are interesting questions and worthy of discussion and can be answered with conviction to some extent. But different interpretations held by Christians about future events do not make God a liar. As I understand Scripture our views in these areas are not slam dunk to the point of contending for them contentiously.
We will all be corrected in time.
Steve Davis
Maybe I do what? Am I agnostic and uncaring about 25% of the Bible? Are you serious? People can say anything but you ascribe this in such a general way as to make your charge meaningless. Does someone make God a liar if they do not hold to a pre-trib rapture or restoration of Israel? That’s what I understand you saying. Correct me if I’m wrong. It does sound like disagreeing with you and with God in these areas are the same.Well said!
Jesus is coming again as He promised. He will reign forever and ever in a new heaven and new earth. Whether His coming is in two phases or pre, mid, or post-trib, whether there is an ingathering of Israel at that time or if Jewish people are being added to God’s people now, whether the eternal reign is preceded by an initial 1000 year reign - these are interesting questions and worthy of discussion and can be answered with conviction to some extent. But different interpretations held by Christians about future events do not make God a liar. As I understand Scripture our views in these areas are not slam dunk to the point of contending for them contentiously.
We will all be corrected in time.
1. Sorry for mistaking
but many of the YRR/CE/YF crowd just don’t care about the precise details of Jesus’ returnas meaning that it was unimportant. [sarcasm] I was obviously mistaken that caring about details is what made something important.[/sarcasm]
2. Why would you not care about details when God filled both testaments with so many? This goes back to my first point. Eschatological agnosticism is just laziness.
3.
different doctrines carry greater weight of impact on our thinking as it relates to other doctrines and Christian life.Of course that is true. The church in Thessalonica had Paul for about 3 weeks. During that time, he got into the rapture and later wrote about their behavior based on that teaching. Is it important for the here and now? Only if you think Paul had a good idea about church planting and teaching.
4.
it’s the blatant error of this insistence by some, including yourself, that to not be dispensational or raise eschatology like a flag to be vigorously waved, is to be theologically inaccurate.When the apostles were living, did they adopt a your attitude or did they insist upon the one true interpretation of future events?
5.
Somehow if i don’t agree with your interpretative notions, i’ve given no thought to the scriptures and made the NT irrelevant.No, you did that all to yourself because of your disinterest in those pesky details God chose to incorporate into the Bible.
6.
and as to me “making God a liar”…..really?This has to do with what the original article was about, supersessionism. If you do not believe in a future restoration of political Israel, you have made God to be a liar. That isn’t my opinion, that is what the Bible says. It takes effort to not see that.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
1.
Am I agnostic and uncaring about 25% of the Bible? Are you serious?Yes I am serious. 25% of the Bible is prophetic details.
2.
Does someone make God a liar if they do not hold to a pre-trib rapture or restoration of Israel?The article is about supersessionism, which is the replacement of Israel with anything else. I am not talking about the timing of the rapture as not all dispensationalists are pretrib. Dispensationalism isn’t an eschatological position as much as it is a hermeneutic.
3.
It does sound like disagreeing with you and with God in these areas are the same.Jesus claimed He is the only way. If I repeat that He is the only way and someone says that they can disagree with me on that point and still agree with Jesus, then he has only deceived himself. I did not invent the idea that God would restore Israel. He said it so many times in both testaments that it takes effort and determination to disagree with God.
4.
As I understand Scripture our views in these areas are not slam dunk to the point of contending for them contentiously.Would Paul have adopted your position on this when he charged Timothy to make sure the churches did not preach any false doctrine? You just don’t see how postmodern in your thinking you really are on this.
I have seen some of your other works. I know you are a supersessionist yourself. That explains so much in your objections. I have seen you falsely try to convince nonJews that promises not made to them apply to them thereby heaping confusion on them.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
[James K]So you really find certitudinal parity with “Jesus claimed He is the only way” with “the idea that God will restore Israel”?
3.It does sound like disagreeing with you and with God in these areas are the same.Jesus claimed He is the only way. If I repeat that He is the only way and someone says that they can disagree with me on that point and still agree with Jesus, then he has only deceived himself. I did not invent the idea that God would restore Israel. He said it so many times in both testaments that it takes effort and determination to disagree with God.
4.As I understand Scripture our views in these areas are not slam dunk to the point of contending for them contentiously.Would Paul have adopted your position on this when he charged Timothy to make sure the churches did not preach any false doctrine? You just don’t see how postmodern in your thinking you really are on this.
I have seen some of your other works. I know you are a supersessionist yourself. That explains so much in your objections. I have seen you falsely try to convince nonJews that promises not made to them apply to them thereby heaping confusion on them.
Actually I lean toward historic premillennialism. Interesting how you see how postmodern my thinking is. Does that make yours modern with assured results achieved by human reason? I have no idea what you mean by your statement that you “have seen [me] falsely try to convince nonJews that promises not made to them apply to them thereby heaping confusion on them.” If by that you mean the promises of the New Covenant, the church as a New Humanity, and heirs with the one people of God in which ethnic distinctions no longer matter, now or future, then yes I stand guilty.
As I understand Scripture there may be a great ingathering of Jewish people at some future date. However for those who suggest an essentially Jewish millennium, rebuilt Temple, restored sacrifices, etc. I fail to see this except as a wooden reading of the text that ignores the New Testament contribution to our understanding. I may be wrong and may stand corrected in the future. Until then I would suggest a dose of epistemic humility.
Steve
epistemic humilityThat is the cry of the emergents.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
[James K]If it is then maybe that’s something positive we can learn from them. However I have the suspicion that the Bible calls us to humility at least a few times. At least consider the possibility that you don’t have the details nailed down. Then you can relax among those with whom you disagree.epistemic humilityThat is the cry of the emergents.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
[James K] Steve, how about if you tell me which doctrines Christians should be dogmatic about and which we should show “humility” about. I know the Bible doesn’t say to do any such ideas, but I will show humility toward you and defer to your wisdom on this. Those doctrines that require humility should probably not ever be taught for fear of getting it wrong. Teachers are after all held to a higher standard. I wait with great anticipation for your list.Briefly, I am dogmatic on those doctrines which are the essence of what it means to be Christian- the fundamentals of the faith, the Apostles’ Creed, for example. I would have strong convictions and yet enjoy fellowship with brothers who differ with me on eschatology and church ordinances. I hold to and practice believer’s baptism but enjoy fellowship with my pedobaptist brethren. When it comes to eschatology neither I nor our church take a position on the timing of the Second Coming (pre, mid, post) or on the millennial question (a, pre, post). Among the leadership we hold different views and have interesting and animated discussions. Our views are not a test of fellowship or obedience and members do not need to subscribe to an official position. Humility is more becoming for those things which have not yet transpired and over which Christians have debated for 2000 years.
Steve
[Paul J. Scharf]…that says: “God, I know what You said, but I am just not sure what You mean. After all, the _______________ (theologians, scientists, academics, etc.) don’t think You meant what You said…” – ???God certainly means what He said. The problem is that we may try to put words in God’s mouth and we don’t yet understand everything He said. Some men seem to understand some things better than I do (or at least make that claim) and that’s okay. They are more assured of their results of study let’s say in the area of eschatology and present their views as “thus saith the Lord.” I’m not there yet.
For one thing, someone mentioned the disciples (and other Jews) in the time of Jesus who had their own traditional ideas of what Jesus’ coming was to look like—the literal kingdom, etc. And they were so wrong about what God was doing at that time. So, I try to be very “humble” about these future prophesies and keep my eyes open for details that are not taught in our dispensational teaching.
Like this: recently, we as a youth group read Matthew 24 and we took note of very specific keys that Jesus gives us—if we are here during this time, we need to be aware of these things:
1. Many will say they are Christ
2. They will do miracles—they want to trick the elect even
3. Many will fall away, betray others
4. Many false prophets will come
5. People will try to get us to go and see “Christ” but don’t believe them! Don’t go.
6. Christ’s coming will be like lightening.
7. No one knows the day or the hour (Harold Camping, anyone?)
So, anyway, I don’t like the chart/timing emphasis in dispensational teaching.
And generally, I don’t like that we think a whole lot more about Christmas than we ever do about Jesus’ return and being ready for that every day. (And maybe that we argue more about the timing and stuff than analyzing what it means to be a ready steward.)
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
Paul taught the thessalonians a specific position on the Lord’s return. The failure on the part of some of them caused them to get into sin. Some of their sin was serious enough that Paul advocated separation from those who would not repent. It doesn’t say they had bad doctrine about Christ and the church. Their bad doctrine was eschatology.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
Please note in Acts 1 that Jesus did not correct them. He only concerned himself with the timing of the kingdom being restored.You realize that when you argue from what the Bible does not say, rather than arguing from what the Bible does say about the passage, you are committing a hermeneutical fallacy.
Acts 1:3
After He had suffered, He also presented Himself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing to them during 40 days and speaking about the kingdom of God.So Jesus instructed his disciples post resurrection. The topic specifically mentioned: the kingdom of God.
When Jesus said to stay in Jerusalem, the disciples asked if the kingdom would be restored to Israel. Here is the quote so there is no confusion.
Acts 1:6
So when they had come together, they asked Him, “Lord, are You restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?”Jesus answered by only dealing with the timing of the question, like I already said. Again, let me quote it.
Acts 1:7
He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or periods that the Father has set by His own authority.So after 40 days and lots of kingdom talk, presumably you and your ilk would have us believe that NONE of the disciples were paying attention to what Jesus said. Further, Jesus didn’t correct them on anything they asked. He only spoke to them about them not needing to worry about the timing.
There is seeing and there is seeing. Yours is the former.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
Regarding the kingdom, I don’t think I am begging at all. There is nothing in the NT that changes the OT expectation of the kingdom. When Jesus teaches on it post resurrection and after all that the disciples ask about it, Jesus only refers to the timing. Peter expected that the Jews would experience the times of refreshing when they repented. This times of refreshing included the Lord’s return. This is consistent with Matt 19:28 and other passages.
About the Samaritans, they should be thrilled that they who were once far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. They would not aliens but full citizens. Also, they would know that since God keeps His promises to Israel, He would also keep promises to them, a people not His people.
To be honest, I know that ruffles the feathers of a lot of old school dispies. So be it.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
Luke 18:31-34 Then He took the twelve aside and said to them, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished. 32 “For He will be handed over to the Gentiles, and will be mocked and mistreated and spit upon, 33 and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will rise again.” 34 But the disciples understood none of these things, and the meaning of this statement was hidden from them, and they did not comprehend the things that were said.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
I understand that supersessionism was a key point of the article. I’m taking exception to the author and yourself that I have to accept the scaffolding of dispensational thought to avoid the moniker of theological rube. You don’t seem to be able to grasp the essence of these arguments and the nuances of theological divergence, not only on a forum, but the divergences over the 2000 year history of the church. You continue to rage blindly about this entire discussion. Your coupling of logical absurdities with inflammatory accusations makes interacting with you a Proverbs 14:7 scenario.
Micah
Just so you know, if dispensationalism was Chafer/Scofield or even Ryrie/Walvoord, I wouldn’t be dispensational either.
I hope that helps you understand.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
http://www.sfpulpit.com/2007/03/19/mondays-mystery-quotation-quiz/ Click here
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
first they say Jesus can come at any time (usually in spooky tones). Then they start singing a familiar seasonal song:
“Ya better watch out, ya better not cry, ya better not pout I’m tellin’ you why _________ __________is coming to town!
He sees you when you’re sleeping, he knows when you’re awake, he knows when you’ve been bad or good so be good for GOoDness sake!”
So I usually run back under my Ryrie/Walvoord/Scofield/St. Paul umbrella of pre-trib, pre-mill COMFORT zone, knowing I am delivered from His wrath, like those believers 1 Thess.
~Cheers
Like this: recently, we as a youth group read Matthew 24 and we took note of very specific keys that Jesus gives us—if we are here during this time, we need to be aware of these things:The trick is to compare the last days, after the church age, to the things that were happening while Jesus Christ was walking the Earth. The things predicted these days (like Harold Camping) are not possible unless there is mass demonic activity, causing many anti-christs to actually do miraculous/prophetic/ yet false signs such as not seen since that day (like Legion going over the cliff). Unlike the days of Stalin, Hitler, (which were terrible, for sure) these false things will occur world-wide. No corner of the world shall be spared either true witnessing of the 144,000 or false teaching everywhere TOWARD receiving the mark of the Beast, or believing the Messiah is coming. I humbly submit these 5 sentences as some of the top reasons eschatology/BK of Revelation is so EXTREMELY important as a teaching/doctrine in our churches today!!
1. Many will say they are Christ
2. They will do miracles—they want to trick the elect even
3. Many will fall away, betray others
4. Many false prophets will come
5. People will try to get us to go and see “Christ” but don’t believe them! Don’t go.
6. Christ’s coming will be like lightening.
7. No one knows the day or the hour (Harold Camping, anyone?)
~Cheers
Discussion