Dispensational belief?

[Ed Edwards]

Dispensational belief?

At this location:
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/3506/2.html
it is said that:

-----------------------------
I notice over 90% of dispensationalists believe in eternal security salvation.

...

That why many IFB & SB pastors are teaching on dispensationalism & security salvation to their congregation today.

I would like to explaining you what dispensationalism teaching on salvation. They teaching there are salvation plans of different ages.

1. Old Testament Period - Conditional security salvation: Faith on God, Obeying the laws, doing daily animal offerings to forgive their sins often and often.

2. New Testament Period - Unconditional security salvation: Saved by the grace through faith, not of works. Only believe on Christ, plus nothing.

3. Tribulation Period - Conditional security salvation: Grace gones, Holy Spirit departs. keep faith on Christ, take Golden Rules, do not worship the beast, do not take the mark of the beast

4. Millennial Period - Unconditional security salvation/conditional security salvation: Unconditional salvation apply to people who already saved during New Testament Period prior rapture, have glorified body, nothing to be worry about salvation. Conditional salvation apply to people, who missed rapture, survived through seven year of tribulation period, will enter into millennial period with their own flesh. These people who still have flesh after they survived tribulation period to enter millennial, will have to obey their King(Jesus). Have to offering animal sacrifices before their King for to forgive their sins often and often. Survived tribulation saints will have to be dsicplined by their King with the rod. If they refuse to obey their King, will die during millennial, will go to hell.


Does the Bible actual teaching according what dispensationalism teaches?

Their teaching is unbiblical.
-----------------------------

1. Do you believe this 'dispensational' teaching?
2. Have you heard of this 'dispensational' teaching?
3. Do you think this 'dispensational' teaching is correct (biblical)?
4. Do you consider yourself a believer in some
form of dispensationalism?
5. are you IFB (Independent Fundamental Bapist) or SB (southern baptist)?

Feel free to read the votes before you answer

 

[humilis]

Bro Edwards,

Good poll, thanks for posting it.

In Christ Service,

humilis

 

[DeafPosttrib]

I am ex-student at Midwestern Baptist College of Pontiac, Mich. That college is IFB. It is very heavily dispensationalism. Because I notice a yellow building in the middle of the campus, It says, "Larkin Chapel". Obivously, that college honors Clarence Larkin, because of his deep theology doctrine. He wrote a big chart book - "Dispensationalism Truth".

Also, there is fact, I have been seen so many baptist colleges and churches teaching dispensationalism, because most are premillennial. Almost every premill baptist churches are teaching on dispensationalism. No way you can deny the fact.

So, my point is, dispensationalism actual teaching there is different plans for Israel and Church of different ages with salvation.

Throughout in the Bible teaches us, there is the only one plan of salvation - faith. Abraham was saved by faith. Just the same we are saved by the faith, even, future great tribulation saints shall be saved by faith.

Faith doesn't separate from conditional. I will explain you why faith doesn't separate from it with scriptures.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

Later this week, I will discuss more on faith, what the scripture saith.

 

[Calvibaptist]

Maybe the classic works of Dispensationalism teach different ways of salvation. I have heard this critique from John Gerstner in Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth.

But I am a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, started by Lewis Sperry Chafer, and home to Charles Ryrie, J. Dwight Pentecost, etc. While they do believe that there is a separate future for Israel and the Church, they in no way suggest that salvation was ever by anything but faith. They teach that salvation has always been one plan - by grace through faith.

BTW, I am no dispensational apologist. I am moving quickly from dispensationalism, but it seems to me that the views you are critiquing are not mainstream.

 

[npetreley]

For what it's worth, I read J. Dwight Pentacost's book Things To Come back when I believed in a pre-trib rapture. Even though his book basically concludes that pre-trib is correct, his work was so thorough that I actually credit his book for raising doubts in my mind about pre-trib.

The more I studied the Bible, the more I came to the conclusion that he (and pre-trib) was wrong. Part of the reason I believe he was wrong was because he was wearing dispensational blinders.

 

[Mel Miller]

npetreley,

Excellent reference to "dispensational blinders"!

If you care to make an abbreviated list of
these "blinders", I will join with you.

Mel Miller www.lastday.net

 

[webdog]

1. Old Testament Period - Conditional security salvation: Faith on God, Obeying the laws, doing daily animal offerings to forgive their sins often and often.

I need further clarification on this. I believe salvation is not predicated on animal offerings or following the Law. The Law was used, and is still used, to show mankind where they fall short of God's perfect standards. Salvation in the OT was the same as it is today: Saved by Grace through faith. The entire Bible, OT and NT point to Christ's death, burial and resurrection.

I'm not sure where I stand on number 4 either, at least how it's presented in the OP.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Mel Miller:
Mel Miller www.lastday.net

I looked at the site you have linked and it's such a jumble that I can hardly get through any of it. There are TONS of assumptions in there that aren't explicitly stated in scripture, and they aren't separated out from scripture, identified as assumptions or backed with scripture references to explain how the author(s) came to those conclusions.

 

[Mel Miller]

npetreley,

We can put together some Dispy "Blinders".

1. That "Christ may come at any moment".
2. No signs must be fulfilled prior to Rapture.
3. Trib-Saints will populate the Kingdom.
4. Trib-Saints are not in the Body of Christ.
5. Elect of Matthew 24:31 are Jews only.
6. The Rapture occurs at Rev.4:1.
7. Day of the Lord is the great tribulation.
8. We are to look for the Son; not for Signs.
9. OT Saints are not part of the Lamb's Bride.
10. Believers rewarded in heaven before S.C.
11. Salvation was by works under Dispy of Law.
12. Church must be removed to allow Antichrist.

I consider these among the many theories that
have "blinded" Dispies to Biblical truth about
the Body of Christ and His Second Coming.

Mel Miller www.lastday.net

 

[Phillip]

Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mel Miller:
Mel Miller www.lastday.net

I looked at the site you have linked and it's such a jumble that I can hardly get through any of it. There are TONS of assumptions in there that aren't explicitly stated in scripture, and they aren't separated out from scripture, identified as assumptions or backed with scripture references to explain how the author(s) came to those conclusions. </font>[/QUOTE]Mel can explain it to you. He's the author.

 

[genesis12]

Your poll is faulty. It asks, "Do you believe THIS dispensational teaching," and "Did you hear of THIS dispensational teaching," etc. Since the one you posted in your OP is not a correct evaluation of dispensationalism, I would have to answer NO to the first three questions in the poll (YES to the 4th, and SBC to the 5th), although I am a classic dispensationalist. Maybe do it again, but leave out the word THIS, which points toward what you copied (horrible grammar included).

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Mel Miller:
npetreley,

We can put together some Dispy "Blinders".

1. That "Christ may come at any moment".

Wrong. This one is easy to disprove but not in a few words.

2. No signs must be fulfilled prior to Rapture.

Wrong. Same as above.

3. Trib-Saints will populate the Kingdom.

Huh? There is no such thing as the "tribulation".

4. Trib-Saints are not in the Body of Christ.

Huh? There is no such thing as the "tribulation".

5. Elect of Matthew 24:31 are Jews only.

Wrong.

6. The Rapture occurs at Rev.4:1.

Wrong.

7. Day of the Lord is the great tribulation.

Wrong. The Day of the Lord begins immediately after the great tribulation. It says that very clearly in Matthew.

8. We are to look for the Son; not for Signs.

Mostly wrong. The signs point to the return of the Son. To paraphrase: When you see these things (the signs), look up, because your redemption is near.

9. OT Saints are not part of the Lamb's Bride.

Wrong.

10. Believers rewarded in heaven before S.C.

I don't know what the S.C. is.

11. Salvation was by works under Dispy of Law.

Yet according to the OT, the just shall live by faith?

12. Church must be removed to allow Antichrist.

Not only wrong, but a bizarre rationalization in order to place the rapture earlier. The reasoning is that the "he" that is taken out of the way is the Holy Spirit, and since the Church has the Holy Spirit, the Church is removed. But this is a stretch that no platic surgery can fix.

I consider these among the many theories that
have "blinded" Dispies to Biblical truth about
the Body of Christ and His Second Coming.

Mel Miller

Okay, I agree with you on the points above that I understand.

 

[webdog]

Not only wrong, but a bizarre rationalization in order to place the rapture earlier. The reasoning is that the "he" that is taken out of the way is the Holy Spirit, and since the Church has the Holy Spirit, the Church is removed. But this is a stretch that no platic surgery can fix.

Then who do you believe "He" is? It's definately someone, not something.

 

[Ed Edwards]

First Day Poll Results:
Dispensational belief? (16 votes.)

1. Do you believe this 'dispensational' teaching?
Choose 1
Yes 6% (1)
No 75% (12)
Maybe, can't tell, or other 19% (3)

2. Have you heard of this 'dispensational' teaching before today?
Choose 1
Yes 69% (11)
No 19% (3)
Maybe, can't tell, or other 12% (2)

3. Do you think this 'dispensational' teaching is biblical?
Choose 1
Yes 6% (1)
No 75% (12)

Maybe, can't tell, or other 19% (3)

4. Do you consider yourself a believer in some form of dispensationalism?
Choose 1
Yes 62% (10)
No 38% (6)
Maybe, can't tell, or other 0% (0)

5. are you IFB (Independent Fundamental Bapist) or SB (southern baptist)?
Choose 1
Yes 62% (10)
No 25% (4)
Maybe, can't tell, or other 12% (2)

 

[Ed Edwards]

Genesis12: //Your poll is faulty. It asks, "Do you believe THIS dispensational teaching," and "Did you hear of THIS dispensational teaching," etc. Since the one you posted in your OP is not a correct evaluation of dispensationalism, I would have to answer NO to the first three questions in the poll (YES to the 4th, and SBC to the 5th), although I am a classic dispensationalist. Maybe do it again, but leave out the word THIS, which points toward what you copied (horrible grammar included).//

Don't think it is faulty.
The poll is doing exactly what I want it to do.
The O.P. is a junk, flawed, strawman.
The poll exposes it for what it is.

I am surprised that as many have heard of this particular
'dispensational theory' as are saying they have heard of it.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:

The O.P. is a junk, flawed, strawman.

You could say the same thing about dispensationalism, period.

 

[Ed Edwards]

You pretty much missed the conversation
(or have I not posted it yet? I'll get
around to it)
You have a dispenation of your own.
You paint all dispenational theories with
the same broad stroke. So you are damning
your OWN DISPENSATIONAL THEORY.

You puttin' it to da' man - but you is the man

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by webdog:
Then who do you believe "He" is? It's definately someone, not something.

Personally? I think "he" is Michael, the archangel, protector of Israel. He stands down (translated "stands up" in Daniel, but the Hebrew could just as easily be translated as "stands down" or "stands still"), after which all heck breaks loose (the great tribulation).

At that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, Even to that time.

It's Michael's job to protect Israel. When he "stands down", he's effectively taken out of the way and that allows the time of trouble to occur.

Notice the similarity of the description of the time of trouble and the description of the great tribulation in the NT. Also notice that it doesn't occur until Michael "stands up". Most people think of it as a time when Michael "arises" (it's even translated that way in NIV) to protect his people. But if that's the case, he does a pretty terrible job, because that's the moment when everything goes sour. Some protector! So "stands still" or "stands down" makes more sense, since it is only after Michael "stands down" that all the trouble breaks loose.

That's the way I see it. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Mel Miller]

npetreley,

The following reference which you alluded to, and which seems like a reference to what I wrote, is incorrectly attributed by Phillip to me. Unknowingly he is attacking me over what someone else wrote above.

In the future, please identify whom you are
quoting so such misinformation can be avoided:
______________________________________________
"I looked at the site you have linked and it's such a jumble that I can hardly get through any of it. There are TONS of assumptions in there that aren't explicitly stated in scripture, and they aren't separated out from scripture, identified as assumptions or backed with scripture references to explain how the author(s) came to those conclusions".
_______________________________________________
I too looked at the site and saw the "jumble"!
I always back up what I write with Scripture!!

It seems you and I are mostly in agreement. The
initials S.C. refer to the second coming of
Christ.

On the matter of the restrainer, I think he/it
will be removed just before Satan is cast from
heaven. Michael's purpose is to instigate all that happens on earth as a RESULT of casting Satan to earth; whereas the restrainer must be removed because of God's judgment on apostasy! The War in Heaven follows Babylon's fall, IMO.

Casting out Satan enhances the Judgment on those who "commit fornication" under Mystery Babylon and who then continue the System under the Beast. At the same time, Israel must be prepared to meet their Messiah and "many in the TRUE Church will be purged or purified and refined" so "all the Saints will be *counted* worthy".
Dan.12:10-11; Rev.12:10-11; I Thess.3:13: 5:23; 2 Thess.1:5,11; Mark 8:38.

The ECF (early church fathers) and reformed theologians considered the restrainer to be lawful government which is administrated by those whom God appoints as rulers. Rom.13.

We know Babylon the Great will be destroyed
at Midweek of Daniel's 70th Seven and that
the remnants of lawful government will go
down with her fall at the hands of 10 kings.

That is when Michael will cast Satan from
heaven to make war against the Saints by
empowering the Beast as the 8th King. The
restrainer of the Beast that "was, is not,
yet is about to become the 8th King" will
be removed when God judges the FALSE church
and replaces it with the rule of the Beast.

There is no evidence that the Beast rules
the entire world prior to the fall of Babylon
the Great at Midweek of Daniel's 70th Seven.

So, instead of the Holy Spirit in the TRUE church being the restrainer, it must be
the apostasy and its "headship" in the FALSE church that will be "taken out of the midst" of lawful govern ment and replaced by the Lawless One". 2 Thess.2.

Michael continues to "stand up" for God's
people; but it is God's will that the 10
kings who destroy Babylon be the instrument
for "removing the restraint" and Michael's
act the means of impelling Satan to exert "great anger" (Rev.12:12; Greek) against the Woman and then "wrath" (vs.17) against the "rest of her seed who keep the commands of God and have the testimony of Jesus". Israel and the Church are targets of the "personified" Beast until Christ appears. Rev.12:12-17.

Mel Miller www.lastday.net

 

[Ed Edwards]

DeafPosttrib: //So, my point is, dispensationalism actual teaching there
is different plans for Israel and Church of different ages with salvation//

Yep, I'm sure that is your point.
My point is that Your definition here of 'dispensationalism'' is wrong.
My quote of you in the Opening Post posits a minority view
of 'dispensationalism'. Such a minor usage that, quite frankly, your
post is a straw man. Sorry, nobody is getting any stars in thier
crown for demolishing straw men

STRAW MAN - 3. a weak or unimportant person, argument, theory, etc.

Now, are you ready for what 'dispensationalism' means?

DISPENSATION - 6 Theol.
a. the divine ordering of the affairs of thew world
b. a divinely appointed order or age

I believe that the dispensation in 'dispensationalism'
means meaning 6b. Note that dispensatinalism is an
eschatology not a soteriology: dispensationalism deals with
last things, not with salvation.
However, both eschatology and soteriology have much to do with:

Theology (Doctrine of the nature of God the Father)
Christology (Doctrine of Messiah Jesus, God the Son)
Pnematology (Doctrine of God the Holy Spirit)

I do not believe it is the nature of God to send his adopted
in Christ, born into the family of God, into the Tribulation Period.
(Caveat: I'm talking a TIME PERIOD. '"tribulation' is just part
of the human condition - in this Church Age, we will have tribulation,
the condition.

I do not believe it is the nature of God to damn His adopted
in Christ, born into the family of God, to hell cause they slip
up, have a momentary lack of faith, denly Jesus to save their
wife and children from being used as sex slaves. Sorry, once Jesus
saves somebody, SALVATION IS ETERNAL from that moment forward.

Both my Eschatology and Soteriology are based on my Doctrines of:

Theology (Doctrine of the nature of God the Father)
Christology (Doctrine of Messiah Jesus, God the Son)
Pnematology (Doctrine of God the Holy Spirit)

and all my doctrines are based on what God has shown me in His
Holy Written Word, the Bible.
Obviously I have to work so can't write long essays about this
proving from the Bible every comma I place is correct, etc.

DeafPosttrib: //Almost every premill baptist churches are teaching
on dispensationalism. No way you can deny the fact.//

Nobody i know of tryed to deny that fact. But please note:
it is NOT a scriptureal fact. SOme facts are NOT FOUND IN THE BIBLE.
All the Bible contains is truth, but not all truth is in the Bible.
But here the fact also is, they are not all teaching the same
dispenstionalism.

DeafPposttrib: //Throughout in the Bible teaches us, there is the only one plan
of salvation - faith. Abraham was saved by faith. Just the
same we are saved by the faith, even, future great tribulation
saints shall be saved by faith.//

Amen, Brother DeafPosttrib -- Preach it!
But you better mention that that faith MUST BE IN MESSIAH JESUS
in all dispensational periods.


Npetreley speaking of J. Dwight Pentacost's book Things To
Come: //The more I studied the Bible, the more I came to the conclusion that
he (and pre-trib) was wrong. Part of the reason I believe
he was wrong was because he was wearing dispensational blinders.//

Strange, i havent' read much J. Dwight Pentacost. I did read the
Bible. I'm the guy who just started this poll cause quite frankly, I
never head of such a dispensational theory as Bro. DeafPosttrib had
heard of (caveat: DeafPosttrib did NOT beleive in the dispensatinal
theory he wrote which I quoted in the opening post {O.P.} here,
but he was suggesting it only so he could argue against it.
Good argument, it is totally a wrong dispensatinal doctrine.)
Anyway, i developed (from the Bible) my pre-tribuation rapture/resurrection
Theory BEFORE developing my dispensational theory. In fact, I don't have
time to study to see what my dispensational theory is cause I spend all
my time witnessing or discussing my pre-trib hope. BTW, I am commanded
to testify (witness to) the hope that is within me. I doHOPE the
pretribualtion rapture/resurrection is what God has in mind for us.
Anyway, I can't speak for Bro. J. Dwight Pentacost cause I don't know him.
I was not wearing 'dispensational blinders' when God lead me to my
pretribulation position writings.

Calvibaptist speaking of the Dallas Theological Seminary,
//While they do believe that there
is a separate future for Israel and the Church, they in no
way suggest that salvation was ever by anything but faith.
They teach that salvation has always been one plan - by grace through faith.//

Amen, Brother Calvibaptist -- Preach it. I've never heard about
there being a differnt plan of salvatin for each different dispensational
time period. Well, i've not heard it from dispensatinalists, only from
mixed up anti-dispensationalists. I guess it is really hard to explain
something you don't belive in at all???

Calvibaptist: // ... but it seems to me that the views
you are critiquing are not mainstream.//

To say the least. We seem to be critiquing a mockery of the
real Doctrine/teachings. At least I find out somebody beside
DeapPosttrib had heard some of it; I know it was new to me.