Featured covenantal or dispensational

Yeshua1 · Aug 1, 2012

Greektim said: ↑

I didn't say he was moving toward Amillism... but I did agree that he is moving toward Covenant Premillism. OR proved that in the post above. Game set match.
Click to expand...

Not quite! he is moving towards the view that there is but one people of faith today, that both jews/gentiles are part of the Body, but he also is NOT stating that the Church repalced fully the promises to Isreal God made, or that the Church is Isreal right now...

if anything, see the progressive dispy movement heading towards merely post trib rapture vie on the pre mil reign of jesus!

Greektim · Aug 1, 2012

Yeshua1 said: ↑

Not quite! he is moving towards the view that there is but one people of faith today, that both jews/gentiles are part of the Body, but he also is NOT stating that the Church repalced fully the promises to Isreal God made, or that the Church is Isreal right now...

if anything, see the progressive dispy movement heading towards merely post trib rapture vie on the pre mil reign of jesus!
Click to expand...

Ok... you need to listen. We are NOT saying that the Church replaced Israel. And if you looked at what was documented a few about PDism either on this thread or the other dispensational thread (think its the other one), you'd see that your statements are unfounded and incorrect. PDism is heading to post trib rapture and basically all things Covenant Premill (post trib rapture too). There is more in common with PD and Cov Premill than PD w/ Classic Dispyism. Fact!

PS... the "moving toward the view that there is but one people of faith today" is not a movement. That has been a dispensational teaching for a long time (from its inception?). Bock and the other PDs are farther from the dispo camp than the uninformed dispos like to think.

Yeshua1 · Aug 1, 2012

Greektim said: ↑

Ok... you need to listen. We are NOT saying that the Church replaced Israel. And if you looked at what was documented a few about PDism either on this thread or the other dispensational thread (think its the other one), you'd see that your statements are unfounded and incorrect. PDism is heading to post trib rapture and basically all things Covenant Premill (post trib rapture too). There is more in common with PD and Cov Premill than PD w/ Classic Dispyism. Fact!

PS... the "moving toward the view that there is but one people of faith today" is not a movement. That has been a dispensational teaching for a long time (from its inception?). Bock and the other PDs are farther from the dispo camp than the uninformed dispos like to think.
Click to expand...

perhaps, but also don't see the shify going fully to where God has FOREVER stopped dealing with the Jewish peoples, or that the Church is spiritual isreal of the new Covenant!

Greektim · Aug 1, 2012

Yeshua1 said: ↑

perhaps, but also don't see the shify going fully to where God has FOREVER stopped dealing with the Jewish peoples, or that the Church is spiritual isreal of the new Covenant!
Click to expand...

No.... they are certainly still premill. But you have some self proclaimed PDs who do use the vocab that the church is "spiritual israel".

This was provided back in page 8 of this thread by Oldregular:

1. Its Leaders

1) Craig Blaising, a former Dallas Seminary Professor who is now teaching at Southwestern Baptist Seminary, Fort Worth, Texas; 2) Darrell Bock, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Seminary; 3) Robert Saucy, who taught at Talbot School of Theology (Talbot Seminary). Due to the pioneering work of these and other men, many have entered the progressive fold.

2. Its Books

1) Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church by Blaising and Bock (1992); 2) The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism by Saucy (1993); 3) Progressive Dispensationalism by Blaising and Bock (1993). A wealth of literature, books and articles, for and against Progressive Dispensationalism has been published in the years following.

3. Its Beginnings

[In this paper we shall sometimes refer to Progressive Dispensationalism as PD.]

In 1985 a group met together and launched the Dispensational Study Group. "What has emerged is unprecedented discussion between covenant theologians, historical premillennialists, charismatics, and the dispensationalists who invited them to the table" (Darrell Bock, Christianity Today, Sept. 12, 1994, p. 26). Notice that it was the "dispensationalists" who initiated this dialogue. "We met because some (but not all of us) believed that there are biblical problems with aspects of the older dispensational position. We engaged in the discussion with all these groups as well as ourselves to sift through the evidence. Traditionalists were on the program with us in virtually every year early on" (Bock).1 "PD wants to find common ground with nondispensationalism" (Christianity Today, 9/12/94, p. 28). "The newer dispensationalism wants to bring itself in line with mainstream evangelicalism" (Christianity Today, 9/12/94, p. 28). "PD is made up of evangelicals who are dissatisfied with the dispensationalism of their forefathers and who have met together to change it" (Thomas Ice, A Critical Examination of "Progressive Dispensationalism," Part 1, p. 5).

"The purpose of the study group (which first met in 1986) appears to be to clarify dispensational issues in order to bridge the gap between dispensationalism and covenant theology....it is a sad commentary on the present situation that whereas premillennialism (out of which dispensationalism gradually emerged) arose in America primarily through early Bible conferences held in opposition to the postmillennialism and liberalism of the day, progressive dispensationalism, in following the ecumenical spirit of the times, is seeking common ground with amillennialism" (Manfred Kober, "The Problematic Development of Progressive Dispensationalism", Faith Pulpit, March 1997). In the days of the early Bible conferences, Bible believing men of different persuasions met together in opposition to religious modernism (liberalism) and in defense of the great fundamentals of the faith and with a renewed interest in prophecy in general and the imminent return of Christ in particular. Today Progressive Dispensationalists are meeting with and dialoguing with men of different theological persuasions because of a common opposition to certain traditional teachings of Bible believing dispensationalists and because of some commonly shared, non-dispensational views on the nature of the church and the nature of the kingdom.

SNIP

9. Its Relationship to Covenant Premillennialism

"The newer dispensationalism looks so much like nondispensational premillennialism that one struggles to see any real difference" (Walter Elwell, Christianity Today, 9/12/94, p. 28). "Will progressive dispensationalism simply turn into historic premillennialism?" (Ibid.) When Bock was asked if George Ladd (a covenant or historic premillennialist) would disagree with his views, he replied, "I think the fundamental thrust of the structure he would not disagree with" (Ryrie, page 166). "I don’t think that they [the progressives] will find it possible in the long run to create a safe haven theologically between classic dispensationalism and covenental premillennialism. The forces that their own observations have set in motion will most likely lead to covenental premillennialism after the pattern of George Ladd" (Vein Poythress as cited by Ryrie, p. 178).

The already/not yet understanding of the kingdom was George Ladd’s position (he was a historic premillennialist and was posttribulational). The progressive teaching that Christ is now ruling on the throne of David was also George Ladd’s position. "Bock admits the closeness of his views regarding a present kingdom to those of George Ladd’s historic premillennialism—a system adverse to dispensationalism" (Robert Thomas, "A Critique of Progressive Dispensational Hermeneutics," When the Trumpet Sounds, p. 415).

In defense of his own statement, Bock clarifies the fact that his position is very similar to Ladd’s but not identical: "The basic structure I affirmed with Ladd was the recognition of a kingdom that is ‘already’ and ‘not yet’ (just like our salvation is). By the way, this view emerged long before Ladd. It is not his. It has been a position many have defended in this century in NT studies before there was the covenental premillennialism of Ladd. However, my ‘already’ is not Ladd’s for the church does not stand permanently in Israel’s stead for me as it does for him. This is a significant difference. Thomas’ quote conveniently ignores the differences between Ladd and myself and simply equates us—or all but does" (Bock).

Ryrie has offered this summary: "The major similarities, if not sameness, between Ladd and progressives are these: (1) the focus on the kingdom of God as an overall, all encompassing theme; (2) the already/not yet, progressively realized nature of the kingdom; (3) the present position of Christ reigning in heaven as the Messianic/Davidic king" (p. 166).

10. Its Ecclesiology (doctrine of the church)

"Israel and the church are one people of God" (Disp., Israel & the Church, p.93, 96 ,97 and see page 119). David Turner goes further than some progressives in calling the church the "new Israel" (David Turner, Disp., Israel & the Church, p. 288). "The old sharp distinction between Israel and the church begins to become somewhat blurred" (Kenneth Barker, Disp., Israel & the Church, p. 302). Progressive dispensationalists "no longer accept the notion of two distinct peoples of God" (Blaising and Bock, Disp., Israel & the Church, p. 392). "In the new dispensationalism the church is reduced to the present phase of the Davidic kingdom. New dispensationalists do not like the concept of the church as a parenthesis....the church is 'a functional outpost of God’s kingdom’ [Barth quoted favorably by Saucy] and a ‘sneak preview’ [Bock] of the kingdom" (Ryrie, Issues in Dz.spensationalism, p. 22.).

Blaising says that Progressive Dispensationalists see tribulation saints "as part of the body of Christ, thus a part of the church as it is defined in the New Testament" (Three Views of the Millennium and Beyond, ed. Darrell Bock [Zondervan, 1999], page 210. See more on this in the discussion under Eschatology.

Denial of the parenthetical nature of the church:

"The older idea that the church was a parenthetical break between God’s Jewish work in the Old Testament and God’s Jewish work in the future is being replaced" (Christianity Today, 9/12/94, p. 28). Waltke: "[PD] denies that the church is a parenthesis within God’s program for Israel." Saucy: "The present age is not a historical parenthesis unrelated to the history that precedes and follows it." "The church is seen less and less as a parenthesis in the divine program. Instead it is seen as vitally linked to and comprehended in the plan of God revealed in the Old Testament" (Blaising, Disp., Israel & the Church, p. 225 footnote). Many scholars now recognize "a present form of messianic kingdom that removes the parenthetical idea" (Burns, Disp., Israel & the Church, p. 225). "[PD] denies that the church is a parenthesis within God’s program for Israel" (Waltke, Disp., Israel & the Church, p. 347). "The present age is not a historical parenthesis unrelated to the history that precedes and follows it; rather, it is an integrated phase in the development of the mediatorial kingdom" (Robert Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism, p. 28). "You are correct to argue that we do not teach a parenthesis" (Bock).

Denial of the church as a mystery unrevealed in the Old Testament:

"Their mystery concept of the church is not that it was unrevealed in the Old Testament but that it was unrealized. As a corollary, God has no separate program for the church. The church is simply a sub-category of the Kingdom. It is called a ‘sneak preview’ of the Kingdom. The church is the Kingdom today. In fact, David Turner calls the church ‘the new Israel’" (Manfred Kober, The Problematic Development of Progressive Dispensationalism, Faith Pulpit, April 1997). Progressives believe that "the concept of the church as completely distinct from Israel and as a mystery unrevealed in the Old Testament needs revising" (Ryrie, p. 164). "We hold to a different understanding of the term mystery—not always ‘new’ revelation" (Bock).
Click to expand...

OldRegular · Aug 1, 2012

Yeshua1 said: ↑

Not quite! he is moving towards the view that there is but one people of faith today, that both jews/gentiles are part of the Body,
Click to expand...

Even classic dispensationalists have never denied that both jews and gentiles are part of the Body of Jesus Christ at present. Hyper dispensationalists, who knows?????

Featured covenantal or dispensational

Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Greektim Well-Known Member

Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Greektim Well-Known Member

OldRegular Well-Known Member

Useful Searches

Featured covenantal or dispensational

Yeshua1 Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Greektim Well-Known Member

Yeshua1 Well-Known Member Site Supporter

Greektim Well-Known Member

OldRegular Well-Known Member

Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
Site Supporter