Is Dispensationalism Elitist?

Ed quote:
----------------------------------------------------------
"Whoever comes and resurrects 2,500 Million dead saints,
i'm going with Him in the Rapture."
----------------------------------------------------------

Trailblazer: "? Where on earth did you get that figure from? Think about it! Only 2,500 million dead saints since the beginning of time until the end of time? Sounds like a failure to me!

A guess, but it was an educated guess.

Here is the hard data i had taken from page 502
of THE ALMANAC OF THE CHRISITAN WORLD, 1991-1992 edition
(Tyndale, 1990)


TOTAL PERSONS, AD 33-1990
All persons born since AD 33: 34,903 Million
All Christians since AD 33: 8,286 Million

But how many who it was said they were Christian
were on God's list of Christians?

Click Verse for Commentary Notes

Matthew 7:14 (KKJV1769):
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way,
which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

So i guessed a few of 2,500/8,286 = 30%
Once i did a poll.
There are some who think few means like 1/10 of 1%
that would mean 8 Million real Christians.
There are others who think only the 144,000 are saved
out of all the multitudes of Earth.

Revelation 7:9-10 (HCSB):
After this I looked, and there was a vast multitude from
every nation, tribe, people, and language,
which no one could number, standing before the throne
and before the Lamb. They were robed in white with
palm branches in their hands.
10. And they cried out in a loud voice:
Salvation belongs to our God, who is
seated on the throne, and to the Lamb!

But the same book of Revelation speaks of an army
of 200 Million crossing a dried up Euphrates River.
So the "cannot be numbered" number must be quite
a bit more than 200 Million. Surely a lot more than
8 Million.

How many do you think would be saved if the rapture were
today? Oops, Posties can't have a rapture for 3.5 years.
Sad, Posties can't have a rapture now, premeies insist
the rapture/resurrection could happen any now soon.

May God's blessings full and rich be granted
unto each reader of this topic. And may
such blessings be unto you all year long
and into your family and your ministry. Amen

 

Well, if I get to "your level" I want to be standing on good ground.


Luke 8:7 (KJV)
7And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it.
Luke 8:8 (KJV)
8And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear

 

Who "started it" and "when it started” are NOT diversions but fundamentally important considerations in Biblical hermeneutics. EVERY BIBLE DOCTRINE, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, CAN BE FOUND THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH. DOCTRINES THAT ORIGINATED CENTURIES AFTER THE APOSTOLIC PERIOD ARE, WITHOUT EXCEPTION, FALSE DOCTINES. The doctrine of dispensationalism has been proved to originate at a time when there was an insatiable thirst for new insights about God and the Bible, and the basic principles of good judgment and Biblical hermeneutics were ignored and a multitude of false teachings and heresies spread like wildfire, and several of these false teachings and heresies are still with us today.

These comments could not possibly be more absurd. If the Scriptures really taught dispensationalism, Darby would not have had to invent it in 1830! Dispensationalism is a man-made doctrine and we even know the name of the man that made it—John Nelson Darby! The Scriptures DO NOT teach dispensationalism and WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THEY DO NOT BECAUSE IF THEY DID SOMEONE WOULD HAVE NOTICED THAT FACT BEFORE 1830! And since 1830, the most able and competent Bible scholars have all rejected dispensationalism as a non-biblical doctrine—indeed, the vast majority of Bible scholars have rejected dispensationalism.

Yes, an accurate teacher of the Bible starts from a VERY different place—the Holy Scriptures—and not from the foolish imagination of John Nelson Darby.

And as Pastor Larry has so eloquently shown us, some dispensationalists have found it necessary to re-write the English dictionary and invent new definitions for the word “literal” because they reject the literal interpretation of the Bible.

Larry is quite right here—those who start with the Holy Scriptures and stick to them using sound exegesis and Biblical hermeneutics and a good English dictionary will arrive at a VERY DIFFERENT CONCLUSION from the most erroneous conclusions arrived at by John Nelson Darby and his followers.

 

I didn't say it wasn't important. I said it was a diversion here. And it is. You still, for some inexplicable reason, say that dispensationalism is a modern invention. That is just flatly wrong. It isn't. Any honest person can figure that out, even if you don't agree with it. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?

That's good, since he didn't. You should know that. You have been taught wrongly, and have not responded to correct teaching. Many here, and other places, have given evidence of dispensationalism all the way back in the time of the apostles and through church history prior to Darby. The newness argument is a straw man that cannot seriously be entertained.

Again, you simply do not know what you are talking about. Dispesationalism is the conclusino of the consistent handling of Scripture. It is not the product of Darby. That is absurd, and you know that.

Larry didn't rewirte English at all. Craig was simply ignorant to some basic ideas in dispensationalism and tried to put that off on me. I gave him source after source that said what I said. Craig, you were simply wrong.

Larry and many others already know that ... but thanks for admitting it

You are again incorrect. English dictionaries are irrelevant to the point. I don't know why you keep bringing that up. Dispensationalism is true in any language. To study the Scriptures, we need a knowledge of the Bible and correct exegesis, and a knowledge of biblical hermeneutics. When you have that and use it consistently, you will arrive at dispensationalism. When you use it inconsistently, you will arrive somewhere else.

Craig, you should have figured out by now that you will not win this. You are simply wrong. But more to the point, you can disagree with dispensationalism without making these over the top comments. To accuse dispensationalism of not having any biblical support shows a lack of honesty and integrity, or a lack of basic knowledge. I know the latter to be the case. We have talked enough to figure that out. At this point, after the length of conversations we have had, I can't help but think that the former also plays a part. You have been shown the references and support for what dispensationalism believes. To say that there is no support for it in Scriputre is to ignore the obvious. I urge you again to get some education on this matter. At least find out what you are disagreeing with. YOu keep making basic mistakes about dispensationalism and what it believes and teaches. This type of post from you is unacceptable.

 

(The emphasis is bold type is mine)


I am not trying to “win” anything! And I am not questioning your honesty or your education. Indeed I am not attacking you personally, as you are me, but only the false doctrine of dispensationalism and its origins. However, since you insist upon attacking me personally, and my honesty and my education, rather than posting direct quotes (in context) from literature published prior to 1830 to prove me wrong, I shall continue my discussion with persons whose character displayed in their posts (and their obeying the rules of this message board) warrants my time and discontinue my discussion with those whose character displayed in their posts does not.

 

Craig,

I made my comments because you keep making statements that have been thorougly refuted. What other explanation can there be? Now the question is this: Why, after having been told and shown the truth, do you insist on repeating things that aren't true? Is it a lack of honesty and integrity, or is it a lack of learning and reading?

The best thing would be for you to simply change your tactics.

You claim you are not attacking me but you did just that in this post by insinuating things about my character. Your insinuations were false, but that aside, you did the very thing you accuse me of.

While I think you are sincerely dead wrong in your position, I do not resort to misrepresentations about in order to show it wrong. (I don't have to, but that is beside the point.) I can respect your position, even though I vehemently disagree with it. I don't resort to the tactics you displayed.

As I have often said, feel free to disagree with dispensationalism. But don't make stuff up about it and don't misrepresent it. You cannot seriously deny that dispensationalism has biblical moorings. You may disagree with it, but it is impossible to say honestly that it has no biblical moorings.

 

Uuuh!!! What was that about “THE EARLY WRITERS” (100-300 A.D.)

THE ANTICHRIST REIGNS FOR 3 ½ YEARS

Irenaeus…"'And its ten horns are ten kings which shall arise; and after them shall arise another, who shall surpass in evil deeds all that were before him, and shall overthrow three kings; and he shall speak words against the most high God, and wear out the saints of the most high God, and shall purpose to change times and laws; and [everything] shall be given into his hand until a time of times and a half time,' that is, for three years and six months, during which time, when he comes, he shall reign over the earth. Of whom also the Apostle Paul again, speaking in the second [Epistle] to the Thessalonians, and at the same time proclaiming the cause of his advent, thus says: 'And then shall the wicked one be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus shall slay with the spirit of His mouth, and destroy by the presence of His coming.'" (Against Heresies, Book V, XXV, 3)

THE ANTICHRIST PERSECUTES THE SAINTS

Irenaeus…"And then he points out the time that his tyranny shall last, during which the saints shall be put to flight, they who offer a pure sacrifice unto God: 'And in the midst of the week,' he says, 'the sacrifice and the libation shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation [shall be brought] into the temple: even unto the consummation of the time shall the desolation be complete.' Now three years and six months constitute the half-week." (Against Heresies, Book V, XXV, 4)

CHRISTIANS ARE TO WAIT UNTIL THE ANTICHRIST COMPLETES HIS WAR ON THE CHURCH

Tertullian…"In the Revelation of John, again, the order of these times is spread out to view, which 'the souls of the martyrs' are taught to wait for beneath the altar, whilst they earnestly pray to be avenged and judged: (taught, I say, to wait), in order that the world may first drink to the dregs the plagues that await it out of the vials of the angels, and that the city of fornication may receive from the ten kings its deserved doom, and that the beast Antichrist with his false prophet may wage war on the Church of God; and that, after the casting of the devil into the bottomless pit for a while, the blessed prerogative of the first resurrection may be ordained from the thrones; and then again, after the consignment of him to the fire, that the judgment of the final and universal resurrection may be determined out of the books. Since, then, the Scriptures both indicate the stages of the last times, and concentrate the harvest of the Christian hope in the very end of the world,..." (On the Resurrection of the Flesh, XXV)

THE BEAST IS KILLED AFTER THE SAINTS ARE PERSECUTED

Hippolytus…"For this is meant by the little horn that grows up. He, being now elated in heart, begins to exalt himself, and to glorify himself as God, persecuting the saints and blaspheming Christ, even as Daniel says, 'I considered the horn, and, behold, in the horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things; and he opened his mouth to blaspheme God. And that horn made war against the saints, and prevailed against them until the beast was slain, and perished, and his body was given to be burned.' (Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 47)

UNTIL THE END OF THE 70TH WEEK, THE CHURCH IS PERSECUTED

Hippolytus…"That refers to the one thousand two hundred and threescore days (the half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and persecute the Church, which flees from city to city, and seeks conceal-meat in the wilderness among the mountains,..." (Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 61)


CHRISTIANS ARE SAID “TO BE PERSECUTED IN THOSE DAYS”
…"For when Daniel said, 'I shall make my covenant for one week,' he indicated seven years; and the one half of the week is for the preaching of the prophets, and for the other half of the week that is to say, for three years and a half Antichrist will reign upon the earth. And after this his kingdom and his glory shall be taken away. Behold, ye who love God, what manner of tribulation there shall rise in those days, such as has not been from the foundation of the world, no, nor ever shall be, except in those days alone. Then the lawless one, being lifted up in heart, will gather together his demons in man's form, and will abominate those who call him to the kingdom, and will pollute many souls." (Appendix to the Works of Hippolytus, XXV)


Victorinus…"The little season signifies three years and six months, in which with all his power the devil will avenge himself trader Antichrist against the
Church." (Commentary on the Apocalypse, 20:1)

THE 2ND RETURN AND THE RESURRECTION ARE THE SAME EVENTS

"For in the last days false prophets shall be multiplied, and such as corrupt the word; and the sheep shall be changed into wolves, and love into hatred: for through the abounding of iniquity the love of many shall wax cold. For men shall hate, and persecute, and betray one another. And then shall appear the deceiver of the world, the enemy of the truth, the prince of lies, whom the Lord Jesus 'shall destroy with the spirit of His mouth, who takes away the wicked with His lips; and many shall be offended at Him. But they that endure to the end, the same shall be saved. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven;' and afterwards shall be the voice of a trumpet by the archangel; and in that interval shall be the revival of those that were asleep. And then shall the Lord come, and all His saints with Him, with a great concussion above the clouds, with the angels of His power, in the throne of His kingdom, to condemn the devil, the deceiver of the world, and to render to every one according to his deeds. 'Then shall the wicked go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous shall go into life eternal,' to inherit those things 'which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man, such things as God hath prepared for them that love Him;' and they shall rejoice in the kingdom of God, which is in Christ Jesus." (Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VII, Sec. II, XXXII)

MORE LATER!

 

DICTIONARY OF PREMILLENNIAL THEOLOGY (Kregel, 1996),
general editor: Mal Couch, page 244.
"Macdonald, Margaret" article by Thomas D. Ice:

//Margaret Macdonald (1815-ca.1840) is
alleged by Dave MacPherson, a posttribulational
polemicist, to be the orginator
of pretribulationism as
a result of a prophetic
revelationin the spirint of 1830. Even though
there is no actual evidence to support his
claim, MacPherson is correct that his
spurious charge has seveed to make the
fifteen-yhear-old Scottish lass "a household
name in CHristian circles."//

Earlier I said: "The whole story about MacDonald,
Irving, and Darby is fiction." My source
noted above verifies my statement.

 

Oh, I forgot.

The present population of the earth alone is 6,505,378,375.000 +.

In regards to the only 144,000. That figure alone would cover just the converts before the end of Paul's life! - that's also what the JW's claim as only 144,000 JW's (using scripture, too!)

Now, I'm sure that you have not had proper time to read the above post carefully. It should silence a few.

I'm waiting for the comments.

 

Interesting quotes from some of the
ECF (early church fathers).
Personally i show pretribualtion rapture/resurrection from the Bible:

---------------------------------------
Pretrib pre-mill outline of time forward:

0. church age continues <== you are here!
1. rapture/resurrection event
2. Tribulation time
3. Second Advent of Jesus event
4. literal MK=millinnial kingdom
5. new heaven & new earth

The timeline according to Matthew 24
(Mount Olivet Discourse, also Matthew 25,
Mark 13, Luke 21):

0. church age continues <== you are here!
Matthew 24:4-15

1. rapture/resurrection event
Matthew 24:31-44

2. Tribulation time
Matthew 24:21-28

3. Second Advent of Jesus event
Matthew 24:29-30)

Not mentioned in Matthew 24:
(4. literal MK=millinnial kingdom)
(5. new heaven & new earth)

The timeline according to Revelation:

0. church age continues - Rev 2-3 <== you are here!
1. rapture/resurrection event - Rev 4:1 (type)
2. Tribulation time - Rev 4:2-19:10
3. Second Advent of Jesus event - Rev 19:11-21
4. literal MK=millinnial kingdom - Rev 20:1-6
5. new heaven & new earth - Rev 20:7-22:5

The timeline according to 2 Thessalonians 2:

0. church age continues <== you are here!
(implied, until the falling away)

1. rapture/resurrection
v.1 - gathering together unto him
v.3 - falling away

2. Tribulation time
(time of the man of sin)

3. Second Advent of Jesus event
v.1 - coming of our Lord Jesus Christ
v.8

Not mentioned:
(4. literal MK=millinnial kingdom)
(5. new heaven & new earth)

BTW, I believed in the pretribulation rapture/resurrection
for 48 years
before i saw these three scriptures as pretrib.
So even if you can prove all three of these scriptures
in error, i'll still hope in the pretribulation rapture
as will 90% of Baptists and kindred Christians.

Speaking with posties they told me that
if the pretribulation rapture/resurrection
were true, then wqhy didn't John mention it?
He did, by type in Revelation 4:1.
Speaking with posties they told me that
if the pretribulation rpature/resurrection
where true, then why didn't Jesus
mention it?
He did when he answered the three questions
found in Matthew 24:3 (as I showed above).

 

Right!!! So you're going to lay your life down for Darby over those whose work came almost immediately after the direct words of the apostles?

 

Incredible! After his testimony of having come to the position of pretrib rapture based on the study of Scripture, you still accuse of being willing to "lay his life down for Darby"?!?!

Re the ECF's, I don't care if Paul himself said it in a source outside of the WORD OF GOD. It must still be tested BY the Word of God! That is what Paul himself said - Gal 1:8 - look it up.

 

Larry,

ENJOY THE READING LARRY! How is it you make these statements if you went to seminary school?

 

Most of what i know about Darby came
from my postie friends

BTW, Darby did not consider the three
scriptures i used to show the pretribulation
rapture/resurrection above -- Darby
did not consider them to show
pretribulation rapture/resurrection.

 

Hi Ed! Long time, no see!

Dear brother, let’s look at the article by Ice more closely. He wrote that “there is no actual evidence to support [MacPherson’s] claim” that Margaret MacDonald is the originator of pretribulationism. And of course that is true. It is, however, also true and acknowledged by Darby himself that he visited the home of James and Margaret MacDonald in the spring of 1830 shortly after Margaret received her very much publicized “vision;” and about six or seven months later Darby began writing about a pre-trib rapture and dispensationalism. Is this all just a coincidence? Maybe . . . and maybe not. The important thing here is that both the pre-trib rapture and dispensationalism are early 19th century man-made doctrines—a FACT that is abundantly proved first of all by the Bible, and secondly from church history.

Baptists should know better than to fall for such ridiculous nonsense, and fortunately many of them do. The rest of them need to be earnestly prayed for that they may come to a knowledge of the truth.

Know the Bible --> No pre-trib rapture.

Know the Bible --> No dispensationalism.

 

He didn't come to it from scripture! He came to it through a seminary school I expect, or at least was taught it from someone, who had gone to a school like Dallas Theological Seminary that was set up with Scofields help, who was influenced by Darby, who knew MacDonald and Irving......

 

I tend to believe that most of the opposition against dispensationalism on this thread comes from many who have never read conservative dispensationalist very thoroughly. I have read CTs quite extensively.

Just curious. How many of the CTs on this thread have actually read:
Alva McClain's Greatness of the Kingdom
C.I. Scofield's Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth
J. Dwight Pentecost's Things to Come
C.C. Ryrie's "The Basis of the Premillennial Faith", or revised "Dispensationalism Today"
Renald Showers "There Really is a Difference" - slightly lighter reading.

I would suggest that most of the criticism against dispys that I have seen here comes from those who have read the attacks against what has often been a misrepresented presentation of dispensationalism! We are still waiting for Gerstner’s “profound apology” for having so badly misstated the dispensational position!

 

Brother Trailblazer, what is your
doctrine on Recendi?

Matthew 24:13 (HCSB):
But the one who endures
to the end, this one will be delivered.
What becomes of those who do not
endure to the end? Do they get saved?
Can they be restored to fellowship
with God again?

 

You can't "mis-state mis-stated theology!" It's built on shifting sand - it's keeps changing as the flaws are pointed out to them. It's just like what the JW's do! Whenever they get challenged and can't answer, they write them down at the headquarter and after a few years they just write another bible!

 

Ethical debate on issues depends on stating the other persons position clearly! If you cannot state it clearly you do not understand it. If you do not understand it, you cannot effectively debate it. So you resort to name calling and suggested guilt by association.

How about ONE. Have you read even one of the books on my list?