Surely you aren't saying that since the word "dispensation" is in the Bible, then dispensationalism's veracity cannot be critiqued or is somehow bolstered?
Of course not. The word "covenant" is in the Bible too. I am only pointing out that long before Darby or Scofield the word "dispensation" was used, and in fact the Bible logically divides itself into definite time periods. There may be some disagreement on what those periods of time are, but there are divisions in the Bible. That fact cannot be denied.
Forgive me Pastor Larry if I use someone`s points.I could do no better in making them other than re-wording them.My point is I think Scofields system violates {2nd Peter 1:20}by taking one verse out of context then to build his theology.Nevertheless it is a pleasure looking at these things with you.
I believe the system of dispensationalism supposes to much.Like the idea of Jesus offering Himself as a King in the Gospels and putting it off to the end of time because He was rejeted.This is Scofields teaching not the Bibles.
I really don't recall my inability to give a valid defense of some of the severe exegetical and hermeneutical problems that were brought up. I just thought we reached an impasse and that further discussion was not beneficial.
But perhaps your memory is better than that of an 80 year old crippled woman who lives in Zambia!
I do recall starting a thread asking anyone to give a passage of Scripture where Jesus Christ offered an earthly Messianic Kingdom to the Jews that went
unanswered until it was closed.
It was an impasse for sure, but from my end it was because you weren't giving adequate answer to some important questions.
No, it was answered. You just didn't accept the answer that was given. In the Bible, there is only one kingdom and it was prophesied in the OT and it was an earthly kingdom. When Jesus promised the kingdom, that's the kingdom he was talking about.
But in the end, we have been through that, and I doubt either of us are prepared to change and it really doesn't bother me what position you hold. You won't answer to me for it, and I am glad about that.
What I also find intersting is that a friend of mine who was a doctoral student at DTS told me that very few of the young professor and students agree with very little of what the former professors taught. For lack of a better word I would call that
eveolutionary dispensationalism.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) from the Introduction to THE FOUR GOSPELS: "All (gospels) record Christ's offer of Himself as King."
ANSWER: That statement is plainly false. Nowhere does Jesus ever suggest in the faintest way that he is waiting for popular or national approval to establish his kingdom or to be an earthly king. Jn 6:15, "When Jesus perceived that they would come to take him by force to make him a king, he departed..." His offer of the kingdom is the same he made to Nicodemus at the beginning of his ministry, "Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the Kingdom of God," Jn 3:3. Also Jn 3:14-16. Take it and be saved; neglect it and be lost.
If I was a believer in Scofield I would worry about this.
I would encourage you to read Alva McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom. It is a very clear defense of the biblical kingdom, packed with Scripture to the point that you will quickly tire of looking it up and studying it. It's not an easy read, which is why most won't get through it, but it is thorough, and for the most part very good.
This is why it was an impasse. You simply refused to answer. You attempted for a bit, but when the inconsistency was pointed out, you just bailed out with "you're wrong." Well, my friend, that's not a reason. It's not evidence. It doesn't support you.
The truth is that the OT clearly describes a kingdom and it is earthly. Ask David, Solomon, and the like. They ruled over it. It wasn't in heaven, and it wasn't in people's hearts.
Again, this is about how we handle Scripture. You are content to handle in ways that I cannot. But asserting that I'm wrong won't answer any questions. It didn't before, and it won't know.
It appears four times in the KJV and each time the same Greek word (oikonomian) is used referring to a stewardship[FONT="]. [/FONT]In the KJV the word only exists in the NT.
Jim what has been the impact of dispensationalism in Great Britain?
Early appearances of the word 'dispensation' IN the Word.
I certainly won't disagree that Jim1999 has a great way with words, but he is at least a couple of centuries late, here, on the appearance of the word "dispensation" in Scripture, as the WYC and WYC-P rendered the particular word in English, in this manner more than 2 centuries earlier.
The BISH, GEN, and D-R (RHE) did the same, prior to the appearance of the KJV.
And in fact, so did VUL, about 1200 years prior to the KJV.
FTR, although I don't read nor have I ever even studied any Latin, even this old KY farmer (and I make no claim to being any scholar or linguist) can recognize the similarity between "dispensatio" and "dispensationem" in Latin and "dispensation" in English.
:thumbs:
Interestingly enough, John Nelson Darby actually renders the word (in the DBY) as "dispensation" fewer times than do any of these other versions.
One reason that the Jews rejected Jesus Christ is that he did not offer an earthly kingdom.
If you can show me Scripture proving otherwise then do so.
No one else on this Forum has.