The Truth About Dispensational Futurism!

[Lysimachus]

These audios are amazing guys!

Do keep in mind that these guys come from Missouri, and they were converted from Dispensational Futurism to Adventism. They have a rough "Missourian" way of talking, with a bit of slang. While I do not necessarily endorse some of their "rough vocal approach", the messages are worth listening to on their own merit. They by far have done far more research into the origins of Dispensational Futurism than anyone else I've ever heard!

I invite you all to listen to the following Radio Audio program as well as read the accompanying documents to help establish a foundation for all the forthcoming material.

If the audio files (load in m3u) do not load and stream using your default media player, then let me know!

Click Audio: The Truth About Dispensational Futurism - Part 1 & 2 (2 hour Radio Program) - by Mike Warren and D.S. Farris

YouTube version: Cut 1 - Cut 2 - Cut 3 - Cut 4 - Cut 5 - Cut 6 - Cut 7 - Cut 8 - Cut 9 - Cut 10 - Cut 11

Along with the above audio/radio program, I recommend the following document that goes along with the audio above:

Futurism: The Counterfeit Prophecy (PDF Document) – by D.S. Farris -- this article goes along with the audio program above – (NOTE: I STRONGLY ADVISE you to read it thoroughly FROM BEGINNING TO END CAREFULLY, as it will lay a crucial foundation. It is my sincere prayer and hope that the data presented in this article will not be ignored by any dispensationalist or futurist.)

- Differences Between Protestantism And Catholicism, The Jesuit Scheme Of Prophetic Interpretation, Ribera and Bellarmine, The Early Church Fathers, EXTRA BIBLICAL INFLUENCES ON THE CHURCH FATHERS, The "Beliar Man"

P.S. The above Radio Program and Document can be found at http://www.HearingTheTruth.org (these men hold to Adventist beliefs, and have done a PROFOUND job in their research. You can find their full list of audio programs as well as a free online copy of D.S. Farris’ book entitled: “Prophetic Toolchest for Dismantling the Dispensational Delusion” (about 550 pages long divided into 12 chapters). Feel free to support their ministry if you like what you read and hear.

[olger]

Amen.

[Lysimachus]

Amen.

*thumbs up*

If any of you here have had a chance to listen to the above radio show from beginning to end, or at least most of it, let me know. And I'd love to hear your feedback. If you know what the "Beliar man" is, then I'm sure you've heard mostly the whole thing, hehe.

[jasd]

Gen 49:1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you [that] which shall befall you in the last days.

Dispensationalism preceded the Mssrs Ribera and Bellarmine – as well Chick Publications by millennia.

Gen 49:13 Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea; and he [shall be] for an haven of ships; and his border [shall be] unto Zidon.

When, in old Canaanland, was the promise to Zebulun fulfilled? Never. Zebulun drew a lot for a landlocked inheritance. Unless, the “last day” promises of Jacob to his sons were squat – there must be a fulfillment not only in the last days – but elsewhere than Canaanland.

Moreover, this theme of dispensationalism runs through the end of Holy Writ. All others are grafted in to the original promises...

[Lysimachus]

Gen 49:1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you [that] which shall befall you in the last days.

Dispensationalism preceded the Mssrs Ribera and Bellarmine – as well Chick Publications by millennia.

[jasd]

Quote:

Originally Posted By: jasd

Gen 49:1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you [that] which shall befall you in the last days.

Dispensationalism preceded the Mssrs Ribera and Bellarmine – as well Chick Publications by millennia.

>>Dispensations certainly existed prior to these men. But not DispensationalISM, as is defined and understood by today's "Dispensationalists".<<

Always best practice to stay with the source – than with the offshoot.

>>Cherishing this doctrine will take one straight to gates of hell if after rejecting the Three Angel's Messages.<<

Cherishing any doctrine will take one to damnation – should they worship the beast and his image and receive his mark. Focussing only upon dispensationalism is just frou-frou.

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Gen 49:13 Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea; and he [shall be] for an haven of ships; and his border [shall be] unto Zidon.

When, in old Canaanland, was the promise to Zebulun fulfilled? Never. Zebulun drew a lot for a landlocked inheritance. Unless, the “last day” promises of Jacob to his sons were squat – there must be a fulfillment not only in the last days – but elsewhere than Canaanland.

Moreover, this theme of dispensationalism runs through the end of Holy Writ. All others are grafted in to the original promises...

>>All old testament typology that has come to a close, and is now going to be fulfilled antitypically (in not the same manner as the type) to spiritual Israel--the one which is anachronistic to spiritual Babylon.<<

Sez who and sez what text? The above indicates that what was literally fulfilled by type during the Spring Feasts of the NT – will now be fulfilled spiritually (“antitypically”?) as regards the Autumnal Feasts? Rotsa ruck with that. There is absolutely no textual support for that...

>>We see this antitypical realization in Hebrews 11:9-14. The shift has gone from the earthly Canaan to the Heavenly Canaan.<<

Has gone? Isn’t that premature? Sounds like Gd is not faithful to OT promises. Ah well, some Protesting .orgs do tend to fethishness re their NT/Psalms – and their extraBiblical missives...

>>All the Old Testament types have been redefined.<<

So then, you hold that the Autumnal Feasts will be “antitypically” spiritual events?

>>The prophecies do not fail, but their methods of their fulfillment will be fulfilled on a far better and more grand and global scale--with the New Jerusalem at the center.<<

Indeed, ultimately – but that evades the remains of earth and its historical fulfillment.

>>The New Jerusalem will LITERALLY settle in Palestine, on the Mount of Olives.<<

That is a way off temporally, yes?—at least after the millennial earthly reign of the saints.

Re: The disposition of the Mount of Olives – that’s if the prophesied removal of every mountain leaves the Mount of Olives still in Present-day Palestine...

>>And the New Jerusalem will LITERALLY be surrounded.<<

All this ‘literal’ – ‘non-literal spiritual’ confabulation leaves one’s head spinning. There is only the One New Jerusalem, which comes down from heaven. That, according to Revelation 22:15, will be surrounded by – “For without [are] dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” Otherwise, it is the

“camp of the saints about, and the beloved city”, which is surrounded (Rev 20:9).

Two different ‘cities’.

>>And the New Jerusalem WILL prevail, and the land promises WILL be fulfilled. But at the END of the millennium, on a grand, global, antitypical realization.<<

Indeed, the New Jerusalem is situated after “the first earth had passed away” (Rev 22:1) – but “antitypical realization”?

>>Dispensationalists need to give up the idea that the Old Testament typological prophecies will be fulfilled in the manners described. [ed.jasd]<<

...as described in Holy Writ. Indeed. Else Gd is a liar. [/respectfully]

>>It's over for Israel. OVER! I'm sorry this is such sad news, but that's just the sad fact! Israel is DOOMED as a nation, and that's just something all Dispensationalists are going to have to digest, whether they like it or not.<<

I say!—whole cloth!—and a disturbingly misconstrued bit of Biblical exposition.

2 Sam 7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.

2 Sam 713 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.

Forever is a long time.

Gd promised King David, unconditionally, that there would never fail him a descendant to sit upon his throne...

That means that somewhere today – a descendant sits upon the throne of David and Solomon. Ain not nuthin’ spiritual ‘bout THAT! Is a literal fact – called dispensationalism.

I purport that David’s throne is now in the British (Brit, covenant – ish, man – or am/an, people; as in British, which translates to ‘covenant man’, or as in Britain, which translates to ‘covenant people’) Isles, but that the thrice overturned ‘crowning stone’ liafail (arguably, the anointed stone whereupon Jacob laid his head and dreamed of angels ascending and descending) has been returned to Scotland.

Every throne in Europe has Saxon blood – Saxon, as in Isaac’s sons... (Gen 21:12)

The history of elect of Israel is marvelously overwhelming... Selah

However, our near future is fraught with peril in that the prophesied waste of our lands, destruction of our cities, and enslavement of our peoples – are near future.

2 Sam 7:24 For thou hast confirmed to thyself thy people Israel [to be] a people unto thee for ever: and thou, LORD, art become their God.

Forever is a long time – even through the times of cynics, skeptics, and Protesting .orgs.

(per Abijah re David, Gd sealed His promise to David with a covenant of salt – that is, a perpetual covenant)

[Truth Files]

British/Israelism is the hoax promoted by the late Herbert W. Armstrong [WWCG] .... there is no truth to this fable

He was also a false prophet .... he said that He was the Lord's end time prophet .... he also said that Hitler was the beast of Revelation and that Mussolini was the false prophet of Revelation .... he was wrong

And do you know that his WWCG is a spin off of EGW's SDA?

Two birds of a feather .... just a different twisting

The things that people will follow and believe without investigating the details is just appalling

Beware of false prophets and false teachers who come to deceive and to make mush out of the Lord's prophetic word for the purpose of promoting self gain [Matthew 24:4-4]

[Lysimachus]

Quote:

Originally Posted By: jasd

Gen 49:1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you [that] which shall befall you in the last days.

Dispensationalism preceded the Mssrs Ribera and Bellarmine – as well Chick Publications by millennia.

>>Dispensations certainly existed prior to these men. But not DispensationalISM, as is defined and understood by today's "Dispensationalists".<<

Always best practice to stay with the source – than with the offshoot.

[Kevin H]

Truth flys: I'm sorry but Armstrong was not an offshoot of Ellen White's Seventh-day Adventism. They were an offshoot from a different branch of millerism. So a similar background, but not a direct offshoot from us. You getting your facts wrong here and making insinuations based on these false facts, is simply being sloppy with facts and history and thus makes you loose credibility. If this history of Armstrong is an example of your sloppyiness on other matters as well, I need to fight the temptation to not read the words "out the window" when I see your screen name.

[Truth Files]

"I'm sorry but Armstrong was not an offshoot of Ellen White's Seventh-day Adventism. They were an offshoot from a different branch of millerism."

>No difference .... Millerism; Whiteism ..... all the same

>And before you play your "sloppy card", better check out the facts about Armstrong ..... I know the record about this spin off

>You tell me about your idea with facts

[Kevin H]

There is the book "The Radio Church of God" that was published by Seventh-day Adventists. But I have also read it in other more scholarly books about comparative religions that I would read when working on my masters and my training as a chaplain assistant in the Army. Were all these books wrong?

[Lysimachus]

I've done my research on Herbert Armstrong myself, and I guarantee you Truth Files that Kevin H is right.

Loughborough documents in his book "The Second Great Advent Movement" how there was a large meeting held in in what to name the Church, and 99% of them voted for the name "Seventh-Day Adventist", and only a handful wanted it named "Church of God". These men split off from the majority and formed the "Church of God", and Armstrong is branched off of them.

So Armstrong is not a branch off of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. He is a branch off of the Millerite line--a branch that refused to come into line with the brethren who knew their Bibles.

[Lysimachus]

So I'm sorry Truth Files, Adventism is the main body, the true descendants of true Protestantism.

Anything else is fictitious imagination.

[Lysimachus]

There are like 130,000 members I believe to the WWCG. Compare that to 17 million Adventists.

Also, when you say Truth Files that Armstrong is branched off of EGW SDA, you make it sound as if that must mean "EGW SDA" is "wrong". That is a very childish and stupid way to reason.

How many cult groups have formed that split off from your Dispensational groups? THOUSANDS! Numerous cultic sects have "branched off" of your Jesuit Dispensational theology.

I'll take EGW over a Jesuit any day. You can kiss up to your beloved Cardinals who will bestow their blessing on you for poisoning SDA's with their doctrines--just what they were hoping. They love people like you.

[jasd]

>>British/Israelism is the hoax promoted by the late Herbert W. Armstrong [WWCG] .... there is no truth to this fable <<

Whoa! there – Bubba. Although HW Armstrong may have promoted British Israelism, it predated him by centuries – when the Bible became more readily available to serious expositors. Let’s not be goin’ and throwin’ the baby out with bathwater... Besides,

a great portion of our early Colonists emigrated from Europe believing in British Israelism. It was a readily accepted truism of the 17th and 18th centuries.

>>He was also a false prophet ....<<

He may have been; however, in what manner of speaking? –as Writ gives us at least three definitions which define a prophet...

>>...he said that He was the Lord's end time prophet ....<<

By what manner of speaking?

>>...he also said that Hitler was the beast of Revelation and that Mussolini was the false prophet of Revelation .... he was wrong<<

Was he speaking in dualistice terminology or as unequivocally as does the .Org re the Pope?

>>And do you know that his WWCG is a spin off of EGW's SDA?<<

It is purported, yes.

>>Two birds of a feather .... just a different twisting<<

Did EGW believe in British Israelism? I didn’t know...

>>The things that people will follow and believe without investigating the details is just appalling <<

One assumes that you’ve done just that, investigate, yes? So, explain to me how Gd can make an unconditional promise such as

2 Sam 713 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.

and then renege? Or are you simply hyperbolizing?

>>Beware of false prophets and false teachers who come to deceive and to make mush out of the Lord's prophetic word for the purpose of promoting self gain [Matthew 24:4-4]<<

I suppose you refer to HW Armstrong and EGW... Okay, tell me how British Israelism doesn’t work (that is, a hoax)? You’re not one of

those disciples of Modern Evangelicism who believe that the core of end-times Bible prophecy finds its fulfillment in present-day State of Israel, are you?

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:Lysimachus

Also, when you say Truth Files that Armstrong is branched off of EGW SDA, you make it sound as if that must mean "EGW SDA" is "wrong". That is a very childish and stupid way to reason.

How many cult groups have formed that split off from your Dispensational groups? THOUSANDS! Numerous cultic sects have "branched off" of your Jesuit Dispensational theology.

“Jesuit Dispensational theology”? Isn’t that the same sort of reasoning that you chided, as

“very childish and stupid way to reason"?

Fact of the matter is: Anyone who simply peruses Holy Writ knows that Gd instituted Dispensationalism.

On supporting fact is:

Amos 3:2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: ...

Sounds like Dispensationalism to me - notwithstanding Jesuits, et al.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:Lysimachus

Sticking with the "source" does not work when we are helping Dispensationalists see that we disagree with their theology.

[...]

But in the meantime, the Local Palestinian types are blinding them, and these scales must come off if they want to endure what is coming upon the whole world.

Looks like a dissertative essay to me. Do you expect people to respond to such lengthiness? Well, I may or may not – catch as catch can – remember, I already told you

I barely think 10-words per minute. That doesn’t take into account any

cognitive ( or peculiar to me - dissonant ;-) shuffling...

[Lysimachus]

God told Solomon he'd establish His throne forever too. Last time I checked, Solomon is dead. So is David.

Ellen White tells us that had Solomon remained faithful, His kingdom would have lasted forever. Plan A would have materialized. The world would have been converted, and their enemies subdued, and slowly but surely Solomon's kingdom would have transformed into a utopia.

God's promises never fail, but those who break the covenant with him cannot inherit the benefits of that covenant. It takes 2 to make a covenant--which means a "pact", a "contract", an "agreement", a "promise" between two parties. In order for the agreement to work, both parties have to keep their promise. When one breaks the contract, the other one cannot be blamed for breaking it. Only the one who broke it.

Unconditional? Yes, unconditional providing the other party fulfills his side of the bargain, and keeps his portion of the pact. When I God says "I will do this, and I will do that"....ALWAYS is it under this pretext.

Until Dispensationalists learn this, they will never get anywhere.

[jasd]

>>God told Solomon he'd establish His throne forever too. Last time I checked, Solomon is dead. So is David.<<

Good catch, we all die – but what of the throne? According to Gd’s unconditional promise to them – that selfsame throne must still be extant today – that is, with a functioning king or queen sitting upon it having certain functions as pertain a king or queen. If there is no descendant of David sitting upon a throne today, then

the Gd of the Bible is a liar and a scoundrel. [/respectfully]

>>Ellen White tells us that had Solomon remained faithful, His kingdom would have lasted forever.<<

Does a functioning throne indicate a kingdom? Well,

2 Sam 7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.

Forever is a long time.

>>Plan A would have materialized.<<

Funny, Holy Writ makes no mention of a Plan A. Is there a bit of eisegesis warping and woofing through her writings?

>>The world would have been converted, and their enemies subdued, and slowly but surely Solomon's kingdom would have transformed into a utopia.<<

Gd had already inspired His prophets to write certain of the end of all things in contrast to an imagined Plan A. Should history have unfolded otherwise than it did, then the Gd who declares Himself Gd because He knoweth the end of things before they come to pass – would be revealed a fraud. [/respectfully]

>>God's promises never fail, but those who break the covenant with him cannot inherit the benefits of that covenant.<<

True, as far as that goes. The promise we speak of was re the throne and not of this or that descendant... Should a prince or princess of David’s progeny prove unworthy – than Gd would pass him or her over to select another of the line. But the throne goes on...

>>It takes 2 to make a covenant--which means a "pact", a "contract", an "agreement", a "promise" between two parties. In order for the agreement to work, both parties have to keep their promise. When one breaks the contract, the other one cannot be blamed for breaking it. Only the one who broke it.<<

True, however, either party can choose to honor the terms of the “pact”, “contract”, “agreement”, etc. But what does have to do with the unconditional covenant Gd made with David and Solomon?

>>Unconditional? Yes, unconditional providing the other party fulfills his side of the bargain, and keeps his portion of the pact. When I God says "I will do this, and I will do that"....ALWAYS is it under this pretext.<<

That is a non sequitur. Unconditional means exactly that – unconditional.

>>Until Dispensationalists learn this, they will never get anywhere.<<

And – until the doctrinaire learns to eschew eisegesis – he or she will struggle with the common reading of Writ.

[John317]

And do you know that his WWCG is a spin off of EGW's SDA?

Two birds of a feather .... just a different twisting

No, this is not true. Armstrong was never an SDA or a believer in Ellen G. White's prophetic ministry.

I suggest that you do some research and prove this statement of yours or else retract it.

Where are you getting your information? Be sure to look carefully. This is how rumors get passed on from one foolish person to another, because they don't take the time to verify what they read or hear. Don't accept something just because it supports something you want to believe.

Be sure to post here the result of your research.

[Truth Files]

I will post the evidence for you .... have to run right now

[John317]

....You getting your facts wrong here and making insinuations based on these false facts, is simply being sloppy with facts and history and thus makes you loose credibility. If this history of Armstrong is an example of your sloppyiness on other matters as well, I need to fight the temptation to not read the words "out the window" when I see your screen name.

You haven't seen the half of it, Kevin. There are other posts that are far, far worse.

"Truth Files" also said that (1) Ellen White claimed that she alone discovered the Investigative Judgment, and (2) Ellen White predicted on the basis of a vision that no more humans on earth would ever be saved.

All this without any evidence whatsoever. So much for truth.

[John317]

OK. Remember to post quote and references.

I'd like to suggest that you get your information from legitimate websites that have high standards of scholarlship and honesty. Your anti-SDA and anti-White websites don't qualifiy. That would be like my going to anti-Mormon sites to find out the truth about Mormonism or to anti-JW sites for the truth about JWs. That's never a good idea. Same principle applies to SDAs or any other church.

[Truth Files]

When the great disapointment came many of the Millerites left the SDA and later formed the Church of God [7th day] .... then later, Armstrong's WWCG was hatched

EGW covered for Miller's failures and she and her associates formed the SDA

Both movements carry very similar dogmas today like sabbath keeping and similar legalisms, but with differences in the interpretation of bible prophecy

.... and obviously with different iconic leaders

The splitting still exists today .... but there is some cross over

[Kevin H]

When the great disapointment came many left the SDA and later formed the Church of God [7th day] .... then Armstrong's WWCG was hatched

Both movements carry very similar dogmas today like sabbath keeping and similar legalisms, but with differences in the interpretation of bible prophecy

.... and obviously different iconic leaders

They did not leave the Seventh-day Adventist church as it did not form at this time. Different Millerites tried to come up with explanations and formed different groups. One group was the Seventh-day Adventists, one was the Advent Christian Church, Several became Church of God, including Church of God [7th day]. These were Millerites that went different directions. Yes a similar root, but different groups. Armstrong came from a group that did not accept Ellen White's ministry. Ellen White fought strange ideas and brought us back into orthodoxy. Some without her influence became tossed too and fro by every wind of doctrine. So your above post supports our argument against you, it does not support your views, Thank you for agreeing with us and disagreeing with your previous post. However I thought you were going to try to prove your point.