What is your understanding of dispensationalism?

[Gerr]

I have a syllabus from a Baptist Bible College (I think) that briefly defines it this way:

A dispensation is a period of time during which God deals in a particular way with man in respect to sin and to man's responsibility.

It mentions 8 dispensations: 1) Dispensation of Innocence 2) Conscience 3) Human Gov't 4) Promise 5) Law 6) Grace 7) Tribulation or Judgment 8) Kingdom.

I don't see any statement that people are saved differently under these different dispensations.

[BobRyan]

Ask some one at that Baptist Bible College - how the Jews were saved before the cross.

[doug yowell]

I have a syllabus from a Baptist Bible College (I think) that briefly defines it this way:

A dispensation is a period of time during which God deals in a particular way with man in respect to sin and to man's responsibility.

It mentions 8 dispensations: 1) Dispensation of Innocence 2) Conscience 3) Human Gov't 4) Promise 5) Law 6) Grace 7) Tribulation or Judgment 8) Kingdom.

I don't see any statement that people are saved differently under these different dispensations.

That's a very strange way to describe periods of time, especially #'s 3&4.Doesn't the paragraph in which a dispensation is defined address the way people are saved defacto?

[olger]

Dispensationalism insists on a radical division between the Testaments and sees no organic relation between them. Dispensationalism also makes God arbitrary - a greater sin.

`g

[ClubV12]

I tend to loose understanding of these spiritual things when it moves toward a more philosophic realm. Questions like the nature of Christ are to complex for me at this point. He was man, He was God, thats about all I can handle on that!

I do fairly well reading what is written in the word or the Spirit of Prophecy. Like a mechanic, simply reasoning from cause to effect. Drawing charts, doing the math, things that work in a more practical sense. I'm glad we have folks who can deal with these difficult to get a handle on subjects and can offer some insight that helps me grasp the principals.

Near as I can figure, if I really trust in Him with a true and humble heart, He will help me walk like Him, talk like Him, be like Him and invite me into His Kingdom in due time. Didn't it always work like that? Seriously, I'm not sure how that worked in the days of Moses, or some other "dispensation"? Was it different at some point?

[Lysimachus]

Dax Sean Farris (now deceased since Nov. 2010 due to heart-failure at age 37), used to be a Dispensationalist. He was converted to Adventism around the age of 21 from my understanding, and over the last 16 years of his life had compared and studied into the essence of Dispensationalism and Adventism more than most today.

Hence his book, "Prophetic Toolchest for Dismantling the Dispensational Delusion" -- about 550 some pages total. His brother, Michael Farris, whom I am in contact with now, is an author and writer and studied at Andrews in Church theology. He is polishing up his brother's book, and fixing it up so that it can be published.

D.S. Farris is an expert at what exactly is Dispensationalism, and what are the ultimate consequences of this belief. While on the outside, it may seem "okay", words cannot even begin to describe the tragic theological implications it imposes upon society.

Dr. Froom succinctly puts it:

• “The early Christians accepted their status as heirs according to the promises made to the true Israel. And just as they interpreted the Old Testament prophecies (including the book of Daniel) historically, so they expected the fulfillments of the Apocalypse to take place in the unfolding events of history during the new Christian Era, which they recognized as having already begun in their day. The difference between them and the later Historicists was chiefly that they expected the fulfillments to be completed in a much shorter time. They did not, like the modern Futurists, take the prophecies away from the church by leaving a gap from the time of Christ's first advent until after His second appearing.

  A Jewish kingdom on earth was no part of the faith of the early church. Nor are certain developments in modern premillennialism the heir of the Historicist interpretation of the Reformation and post-Reformation. Strange as it may seem, Protestant Futurism is the direct descendant —doubtless unwittingly—of the Jesuit Futurist counterinterpretation, originally introduced to divert the finger of accusation away from the Papacy.

  And the extreme Dispensationalism that puts law at variance with grace, rebuilds the wall of separation between Jew and Gentile, divorces the church from the kingdom, divides the covenant of grace, and takes the Lord's Prayer, the beatitudes, and many other Scriptures away from the church, is not a continuation of the faith of the past. It should be added that this is recorded as a mere matter of historical fact, regardless of agreement or disagreement, and not as an attack on the holders of such doctrines. (Dr. LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 1227.)

Charles C. Ryrie explains:

• “The essence of dispensationalism, then, is the distinction between Israel and the Church” (Dispensationalism Today, 47.)

Lewis S. Chafer states:

• “The distinction between the purpose for Israel and the purpose for the Church is about as important as that which exists between the two testaments” (Systematic Theology, Vol. 4, 47.)

Dispensationalism is far more than just "8 dispensations" or "7 economies" or "7 covenants" (small differences in dispensational thought), but it is an entire carefully crafted architecture to help deceive the world and place Lucifer's eye at the top of the pyramid. It appears very Biblical, but Dispensationalism by far is the Devil's best theological work yet. It is the most deceptive, because it appears so close to truth yet is so deadly. It is toxic to the Three Angel's Messages, and basically destroys Sabbath keeping, and prevents ANYONE from seeing any fulfillment of prophecy in the Papacy.

According to the Scofield Reference Bible, Ft. notes on Gen. 1, these seven economies are said to be:

(1) Innocence: Before the fall of man;

(2) Conscience: From Adam to Noah;

(3) Human Government: From Noah to Abraham;

(4) Promise: From Abraham to Moses;

(5) Law: From Moses to Christ;

(6) Grace: The Church Period;

(7) Kingdom: The millennial period.

Intertwined with these seven economies, there is said to be seven covenants:

(1) Adamic (Gen. 3:15);

(2) Noahic (Gen. 9:1);

(3) Abrahamic (Gen. 15:18);

(4) Mosaic (Ex. 19:25);

(5) Palestinian (Deut. 30:3);

(6) Davidic (2 Sam. 7:16);

(7) New (Heb. 8:8).

Sadly, and unfortunately, what Dispensationalists fail to grasp is that each of these covenants were simply gradual reintegrations of the overall-over-arching-over-encompassing, Everlasting Covenant, that enveloped all of them! These covenants were given over time to eventually restore the Eternal Creation Covenant given in Eden.

In closing,

• “The Oxford Movement was by nature…ecumenical. In other words, the dispensational futurist movement in Protestantism in its beginnings was by nature, ecumenical. Many dispensationalists, today, are divided between working with Rome and maintaining distance from Rome. Dispensationalists who maintain distance from Rome do not understand the causality of their religion from its inception (Tractariansim), whereas dispensationalists who work with Rome are carrying out the function of their ideology—inculcated by Rome and the Jesuits to subvert evangelicals into making America an Evangelical/Catholic power structure.” (Prophetic Toolchest, Chapter 10: The Two-Horned Beast: Part One – The False Prophet, pg. 1)

[ClubV12]

Oh man, that was deep Lysimachus.

I like my idea, I'll just trust Jesus until I'm able to figure this stuff out.

[Lysimachus]

Don't worry Club, one of these days I'll be running to you to help me know how to deal with Mormons. You said you were once a Mormon, right? Or was it JW?

[ClubV12]

I do owe a lot to the Mormons. I dearly love those brothers in white shirts and ties who came to my house when I was just a youngster and taught me and my sister about the word of God! They planted a seed, it took root, slow growing, but it took root! :)

[Lysimachus]

I do owe a lot to the Mormons. I dearly love those brothers in white shirts and ties who came to my house when I was just a youngster and taught me and my sister about the word of God! They planted a seed, it took root, slow growing, but it took root!

It's amazing at how God uses people in spite of themselves. God is able to use people who are sincerely deceived to reach hearts and plant seeds.

I'm curious to learn how and why you gave up Mormonism, and what did you see in the Bible that caused you to leave. PM me if you like.

[doug yowell]

It's amazing at how God uses people in spite of themselves. God is able to use people who are sincerely deceived to reach hearts and plant seeds.

Coincidentally, God saved me thru the direct influence of an ultradispensationalist Bible study that I never wanted to attend in the first place.

[ClubV12]

...thats easy, it was the holy underwear my aunts kept talking about!

I never really did accept that faith like my family did, always a black sheep wanting to do my own thing, pursue my own goals, just fell away from Christianity in general. But could never get over the idea that God wanted me to serve Him in some capacity. Like those Mormon guys had done for me.

I met a few Adventists along the way and over the years, they ranged from absolute off the wall, out there fanatics of the highest order to really nice folks. In spite of the "radicals" the basic doctrines made sense. More sense than the Mormon doctrines. I ALMOST became a Baptist when I started my spiritual quest. But the local politics in the church were such that I could not go along with them. Side note: My Mormon Aunts used to go on and on about their "holy underwear" and that always freaked me out.

I moved to Oregon to pursue my spiritual quest in earnest. I started looking for a church or find some spiritual people. Tried a few different things and groups, didn't work out. I found out about some evangelistic meetings by another church, but had missed several of the first meetings and didn't want to come in the middle. SO, I thought the NEXT TIME I see something like that I'll jump right on it. Not long after, I got a postcard in the mail, an Evangelistic series starting not far from my house.

So I started going, with a Catholic friend of mine. She dropped out when we came to that whole "mark of the beast thing". I almost followed her, but the evangelist (Bryan McMahon) said I couldn't leave!!!! I'm like WHAT???? He said I knew to much now, I was in to deep, I had "survived", I had to stay. Strangely, that was what I needed to hear.... The rest is history unfolding.

The night he spoke about "jewlry" was pretty tough, I thought for sure he was talking about my car. The flashy red one with side pipes, the big motor, the one that draws attention like crazy where ever I go. I thought, if I do this, they might make me sell my car! The HORROR!!! That car was my life, it was everything!! And sure enough, at some point I realized it had to go. But not a SINGLE person in the church ever told me that. Until after I sold it, and then they all said, "We knew you would"! :)

[Lysimachus]

Now that's quite a testimony ClubV12!

Thanks for sharing!

Yeah, that "Mark of the Beast" thing sure tends to scare them off. I think we need to revamp our ways in presenting it rather than just throwing up a bunch of Catholic quotes on the screen. Eugene Prewitt in his book "Deeper" does a profound job at how to present the doctrine of the Mark of the Beast in how it is intrinsically tied to Sunday worship using the Bible and the Bible alone without any other historical quotes or Catholic quotes.

[Kevin H]

Thank you for sharing ClubV12!!!

[olger]

God bless Club12 !!

He already has.

[12tribes]

Dispensationalists are those who believe in the pre-tribulational rapture of the church. They teach that the final week of Daniel 9 has yet to be fulfilled, that the church will be raptured at the start of the final week. The problems with this beliefs is that Daniel 9 has been fulfilled, I see it as an attack on 1844 message the 2300 days in Daniel 8 to take the focus of 1844 and to get people to believe a futurist ideas.

[Lysimachus]

Dispensationalists are those who believe in the pre-tribulational rapture of the church....that the church will be raptured at the start of the final week.

While you are right that Dispensationalism's beliefs are definitely an attack on the 2300 days and 1844, but this is partially true, as Dispensationalism is a lot more than that yet. There are pre-trib Dispensationalists and post-trib Dispensationalists. Those Dispensationalists who believe in a post-tribulation rapture (and are many) still believe in the postponed 70th week, that the Church will endure persecution during the 7 years and face the Antichrist, and also hold to a plain distinction between Israel and the Church. Their only main issue of contention is when the Church gets "snatched", but post-tribulationalism is still just as deadly and poisonous as pre-tribulational views, because it still holds to a single-man Antichrist possessing all the power of the Devil, exclusively in the future--and that the Mark of the Beast will be some computer chip in our hand, or something of that nature.

There are Pre-Trib Dispensationalists, Mid-Trib Dspensationalists, Post-Trib Dispensationalists, and Pre-Wrath Dispensationalists.

Mid-Trib believe the rapture occurs in the middle of the Tribulation, in the center of the 70th week at the end of the first 3 1/2 years, and that we escape the second 3 1/2 years. You will find very few Dispensationlists who hold to this view. Pre-Wrath Dispensationalists believe that God's Church goes through most of the Tribulation, but that we are raptured just before God pours out the 7 last plagues--we don't escape persecution and martyrdom, but we get taken out of the world just before God pours out the 7 bowls of wrath. Then they believe, like the Post-tribbers, that after we are in the clouds for a while, we come back down and settle on the earth and reign with Christ for a thousand years.

To be honest, Pre-Tribbers have the upper-hand against Pre-Wrathers and or Post-Tribbers. You know why? Because Pre-Wrathers and Post-Tribbers have no way to account that the Church is taken to heaven and dwell in the mansions prepared for them--because they have to come right back down after they are caught up to reign on the earth for a thousand years. They leave no slot for the saints to be in heaven. Pre-Tribbers attempt to resolve this problem by putting the rapture 7 years prior, so that the Church gets to dwell in the mansions prepared for them in heaven for 7 years before coming back with Christ at the Second Coming to reign on the earth during the thousand years. This they figure solves the problem and allows Christ's feet to touch the Mount of Olives at the Second Advent.

Adventists resolve all this unnecessary quagmire they have found themselves in. They are ALL wrong! The time when Christ puts his feet on the Mount of Olives is NOT at the Second Coming, but at the Third Coming at the END of the millennium. And the 1000 years will not be on earth, so this is why they are so confused---as long as they hold to a view that there is a 1000 year reign on earth, they will forever be fighting amongst themselves trying to resolve this apparent dilemma. At the Second Coming, after the tribulation, all the saints that ever lived get raptured and are then taken to the New Jerusalem from there on. How RIDICULOUS for post-Tribulation Dispensationalists (and even traditional Historicist Pre-Millennialists) to think that the saints get caught up, only to be set RIGHT back down on the earth again. Are God's people some kind of Yo-Yos? Is God that WEAK that he must remove them off the earth so that he can punish the wicked? God can protect ANYONE, no matter how many plagues and disasters are falling around them.

I wrote the following in my book:

• Adventism asserts (and still today) the longing expectation of the Blessed Hope, where the literal Rapture of every saint that has ever lived transpires AT the Second Coming and AFTER the tribulation—but not to be raptured into just the clouds only to be set right back down on the earth to reign during the millennium (as most post-tribulationalists teach), rather, they are raptured and taken to reign with Christ literally in heaven for a literal 1000 years, leaving the earth completely void and desolate (Satan’s home, or “bottomless pit”—the abussos). At the end of the 1000 years, the saints return with Christ and the New Jerusalem for the judgment and destruction of the wicked, and to reign on the earth. As the New Jerusalem settles down, these wicked nations (Gog and Magog) are then resurrected, and these are the nations Satan goes out to deceive (convincing them to besiege the New Jerusalem, that Beloved City). This view came out of the Great Advent Awakening which arose out of the United States of Protestant America, not out of Anglican and Catholic England like did Dispensationalism.

  Based on the points listed above, I propose that the views I have espoused offer the only capable system for seriously contending with Dispensational or Futurist ideology. The eschatological Historicist construct of Adventism possesses several refreshing and unique elements from older Historicism, and very few Dispensationalists have taken it on, or are even aware of it. Unlike traditional Posttribulationists or even Pre-wrathers, our view on the millennium is capable of accounting for the many insurmountable eschatological difficulties they create for themselves. Pretribulationalists have the upper-hand when contending with them, for I believe their construed view of an “earthly reign” during the millennium forces them to not account for any time slot in which the saints will literally dwell in the prepared mansions of heaven—thus end up spiritualizing away the rapture. I believe the reverse is also true—that the above view given resolves virtually all the eschatological problems of the Dispensational or Futurist constructs. Later in this study, we will deal with the subject of the millennium from a Biblical standpoint in much greater detail. With all the above listed, as well as information we will continue to study, I submit that the Adventist Historicist approach is the only effective method by which to reconcile a broad spectrum of the eschatological and theological difficulties in the Christian Protestant world that we find today.

[12tribes]

You are right they are all wrong, they are futurists, they put the 70th week in the future, the antichrist is in the future and so on

[Gerr]

Yeah, these guys are all confused. I was skimming through the syllabus and it has this to say about the antichrist: "THE ANTICHRIST will not be revealed until the Church's Departure (rapture) and the first period of 3 1/2 years (or the Tribulation) or reconstruction is over."

There seems to be a general disbelief in the Jesuit conspiratory theories brought out in other threads, but these false theological theories that have departed far from the historic Protestant views have radically changed the protestant landscape. And regarding Babylon of Rev 17, they no longer believe that it has any reference to the papacy.

[hfsturges]

Gerry,

Pardon my late arrival. I would like to make some comments, first on your statements:

Quote:

1) A dispensation is a period of time during which God deals in a particular way with man in respect to sin and to man's responsibility.

2) It mentions 8 dispensations: 1) Dispensation of Innocence 2) Conscience 3) Human Gov't 4) Promise 5) Law 6) Grace 7) Tribulation or Judgment 8) Kingdom.

3) I don't see any statement that people are saved differently under these different dispensations.

(Numbering of paragraphs are mine)

#1 is a good succinct statement of classic Dispensationalism.

#2 is informative, but lacking in Bible documentation. Maybe this is present in the Baptist syllabus.

#3 clashes with statement #1.

[hfsturges]

Olger,

Quote:

Dispensationalism insists on a radical division between the Testaments and sees no organic relation between them. Dispensationalism also makes God arbitrary - a greater sin.

A reasonable statement.

[hfsturges]

Lysimachus,

I would be very interested in getting a copy of “Prophetic Toolchest for Dismantling the Dispensational Delusion." If it is not published yet, is it available in syllabus form?

Quote:

The difference between them (the early Christians) and the later Historicists was chiefly that they expected the fulfillments to be completed in a much shorter time. ~Froom

An interesting statement. The classic Bible chapter, Matthew 24, is a prophecy that has come to be interpreted as applying to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Coming of Christ – choosing certain statements to apply to one or the other. From a practical standpoint, that is how we must view it today.

I am not sure that is how Christ meant it to be understood. Maybe, just maybe He meant to come the second time much, much sooner. Maybe this was intended to be a single prophecy.

Problems arose in the early Christian church over the distribution of food and later the ceremonial law. The “equal sharing” concept in the early church probably did not last too long because of the advantage taken by some (Paul recommended that men get a job and support their families. Though the concept of helping the poor was always strongly supported).

The issue of the ceremonial law was dealt with in the Jerusalem/Antioch councils, but continued to be a problem in the church. Some churches may have been split over this issue.

Shortly afterward a number of well defined heresies began to come into the church. (Especially the western church, through Greek philosophies. The Eastern church, having a much stronger foundation in Jewish thought may not have had that much heresy. – Wilkinson, BJ: Truth Triumph.)

The bottom line is that the church suffered so much from division right from the first, and later from heresies, that Jesus could not come when He had planned.

See Nichol, FD: Questions People Have Asked Me, p. 265-270, 280-283.

[Lysimachus]

Yeah, these guys are all confused. I was skimming through the syllabus and it has this to say about the antichrist: "THE ANTICHRIST will not be revealed until the Church's Departure (rapture) and the first period of 3 1/2 years (or the Tribulation) or reconstruction is over."

There seems to be a general disbelief in the Jesuit conspiratory theories brought out in other threads, but these false theological theories that have departed far from the historic Protestant views have radically changed the protestant landscape. And regarding Babylon of Rev 17, they no longer believe that it has any reference to the papacy.

Well said Gerry. However, sometimes it gets more confusing than even that. I know Dispensationalists, an author for that matter, who believe that the Papacy is the Whore of Babylon in Revelation 17, BUT NOT THE ANTICHRIST! While they believe the Sea Beast of Revelation 13 is a future-Antichrist man, they believe that the Whore riding the Beast is different from the Beast. Even the famous Christian apologist, Dave Hunt (a Dispensationalist) subscribes to this view, and is notorious for being more "anti-Catholic" in his attacks than even Adventists! I invite you all to watch his famous presentation/documentary entitled: A Woman Rides The Beast - by Dave Hunt.

In fact, time and time again I have continued to run into Dispensationalists who hold to Dispensational eschatology, yet believe the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17 is realized in the Papal System, yet not the Antichrist.

This, I began to realize, is a very subtle deception, yet SO CLOSE to the truth. For this reason I took on the work of writing a paper for my book that deals with this very issue head-on. Please feel free to read it:

The Whore of Babyon = Papal Rome, but not Antichrist??

Enjoy! =]

[hfsturges]

Lysimachus,

Quoting again from Froom:

Quote:

A Jewish kingdom on earth was no part of the faith of the early church.

Again, this is an interesting statement. Jesus made it clear that His mission on earth was to institute the kingdom of grace. There are a number of “what if” questions:

Daniel 9:24 lists six mandates for Israel to accomplish to prepare the way for Jesus’ first advent. If they had followed these mandates, and if Jesus had been understood and accepted by Israel .....

How would He have died the substitutionary death?

What turns would history take if a united Israel had carried the gospel to the world?

How would Daniel 8:14 have been fulfilled if Jesus had come “much sooner?”

Before I am stoned for heresy, please frankly consider - what was the purpose of God if these were the conditions met?

A careful reading of Isaiah and of Ezekiel the later chapters contain passages that have been interpreted as referring to the New Earth, and that is how we must interpret them now. But some of these passages show that sin had not been completely destroyed from the earth – consistent with a “reign of righteousness” on this earth before Jesus’ Second Coming.

To ask these questions obviously points to certain answers. I hold these things loosely, and am willing to be disuaded if there are better answers.

[Lysimachus]

I'll be right with you hfsturges! Sun-down worship here, talk soon! =]