Why do Dispensationalists teach Separation Theology?
- Thread starter UnitedWithChrist
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I have a simple problem. Before the sacking of Jerusalem in AD70, the sacrifices for sin were on going.
To be a jew meant to offer sacrifices etc.
Jesus was the atoning sacrifice for sin, once for all time, the curtain torn in two, the temple of God become the temple in our hearts, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, the Kingdom come to earth.
The only way to God is now through Jesus, the gate and the narrow path, for all of mankind, jew and gentile.
The law of Moses is no more, it is the law of Jesus and the Spirit, founded on love, which is the fulfilment of the law and the prophets.
So taking this all into account, all the promises either are dead, because Israel has ceased as a nation, the church is the Kingdom on earth or is fulfilled by the church.
The theology is quite simple taking Pauls teaching.
There is a definate dispensation between the coming of the Holy Spirit and the birth of the church, and the nation of Israel.
Without the Holy Spirit we do not know Jesus. So where is there a place for Israel separate from Jesus, the saviour of all, the cornerstone of the Kingdom of Israel, the reality which brings meaning to the shadow of the sacrificial system for the remission of sins.
So I wonder how a believer who knows Jesus and the Holy Spirit could hold a dual church and Israel view.
To be a jew meant to offer sacrifices etc.
Jesus was the atoning sacrifice for sin, once for all time, the curtain torn in two, the temple of God become the temple in our hearts, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, the Kingdom come to earth.
The only way to God is now through Jesus, the gate and the narrow path, for all of mankind, jew and gentile.
The law of Moses is no more, it is the law of Jesus and the Spirit, founded on love, which is the fulfilment of the law and the prophets.
So taking this all into account, all the promises either are dead, because Israel has ceased as a nation, the church is the Kingdom on earth or is fulfilled by the church.
The theology is quite simple taking Pauls teaching.
There is a definate dispensation between the coming of the Holy Spirit and the birth of the church, and the nation of Israel.
Without the Holy Spirit we do not know Jesus. So where is there a place for Israel separate from Jesus, the saviour of all, the cornerstone of the Kingdom of Israel, the reality which brings meaning to the shadow of the sacrificial system for the remission of sins.
So I wonder how a believer who knows Jesus and the Holy Spirit could hold a dual church and Israel view.
I'm not sure I understand all of your points, but I will mention that Rob McKenzie, who is a former dispensationalist and wrote a book showing the problems with it, said in an audio message that Hebrews is a serious challenge to dispensationalism.
He did a few audios on Hebrews geared toward dispensationalists. I need to look for them and listen to them.
A lot of it is because some mistakenly believe that Ephesians 1:10 is speaking of the "NOW" like the rest of the epistle IS speaking to (but which 1:10 is NOT).
Here's those two audios:
https://reformedforum.org/tsp128/
https://reformedforum.org/tsp129/
If you don't want to listen to them, fine.
I listened to Rob's other audios and found them insightful. These two cover specifically how Hebrews poses a problem to dispensationalists.
I believe the SEALS, TRUMPETS, VIAL *are* sequential; but that there are number of "interludes" ( back-track-explanation parts, and what have you); and
I believe SEAL #1 is at the START of the 7-yr period; Rev19 is at the END of the 7-yr period; and that "kings went out to battle" at a very specific time of year (which will "inform" those future persons [/saints] who will have come to faith WITHIN/DURING the trib years, during a time of GREAT DECEPTION, to help them come to "understand" the TRUTH, as part of things... for them)
No, I do not believe it is "us" (the Church which is His body / or the "faithful" [of us?] as you put it) that will be doin the "to smite the earth with plagues as often as they will" thing... (not at all resembling "our instructions"
)And, what do you think about the [articles pointing out] "the LIST OF 10 NAMES in Gen5 [spelling out a sentence]" (perhaps Chuck Missler)?? Do you think there's something to that?
Well, someone has pointed out that the UNIQUE ORDER of the LISTING of "names [/tribes]" in Rev7 is [for the purpose of] doing a similar thing (since that "ORDER" is nowhere else found in Scripture). Just a thought. I'm inclined to believe it!
[that's my response to your question of "WHY?" (I think in a different post before this one I've quoted of yours)… "why those names and not others?" basically, you'd asked)]I pointed out how Paul said "when" he would rec'v "stephanon/crown" ("IN THAT DAY"... not "this" one, and not upon death [the "unclothed" part of 2Cor5:2-4! ('to be apart from a body, for a time [until the 'resurrection' of the Body at "our Rapture"] upon the DEATH of a believer')])
PLUS, the "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" thing I've pounded, over and over (Rev1:1)!
Will try to get back to you on that, we'll see... but plz do recall how I've stated that the "4 living creatures" parallel the "4-directional plotment" of Israel (in OT passages)... won't go into that here either.
Last edited:
Sam Storms is an ex-dispensationalist, has written a very good book on why amillennialism is a better option than premillennialism, including dispensationalism, and here is an excerpt that gives some very good reasons:
Scriptural Challenges for Premillenialists
Sam Storms
If you are a premillennialist, whether dispensational or not, there are several things with which you must reckon:
• You must necessarily believe that physical death will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ’s second coming.
• You must necessarily believe that the natural creation will continue, beyond the time of Christ’s second coming, to be subjected to the curse imposed by the Fall of man.
• You must necessarily believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
So what’s wrong with believing these things, asks the premillennialist? What’s wrong is that these many things that premillennialists must believe (because of the way they interpret Scripture), the NT explicitly denies. In other words, in my study of the second coming of Christ I discovered that, contrary to what premillennialism requires us to believe, death is defeated and swallowed up in victory at the parousia, the natural creation is set free from its bondage to corruption at the parousia, the New Heavens and the New Earth are introduced immediately following the parousia, all opportunity to receive Christ as savior terminates at the parousia, and both the final resurrection and eternal judgment of unbelievers will occur at the time of the parousia. Simply put, the NT portrayals of the second coming of Christ forced me to conclude that a millennial age, subsequent to Christ’s return, of the sort proposed by premillennialism was impossible.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-the-millennium/
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/...u-must-believe-if-you-are-a-premillennialist/
Scriptural Challenges for Premillenialists
Sam Storms
If you are a premillennialist, whether dispensational or not, there are several things with which you must reckon:
• You must necessarily believe that physical death will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ’s second coming.
• You must necessarily believe that the natural creation will continue, beyond the time of Christ’s second coming, to be subjected to the curse imposed by the Fall of man.
• You must necessarily believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
So what’s wrong with believing these things, asks the premillennialist? What’s wrong is that these many things that premillennialists must believe (because of the way they interpret Scripture), the NT explicitly denies. In other words, in my study of the second coming of Christ I discovered that, contrary to what premillennialism requires us to believe, death is defeated and swallowed up in victory at the parousia, the natural creation is set free from its bondage to corruption at the parousia, the New Heavens and the New Earth are introduced immediately following the parousia, all opportunity to receive Christ as savior terminates at the parousia, and both the final resurrection and eternal judgment of unbelievers will occur at the time of the parousia. Simply put, the NT portrayals of the second coming of Christ forced me to conclude that a millennial age, subsequent to Christ’s return, of the sort proposed by premillennialism was impossible.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-the-millennium/
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/...u-must-believe-if-you-are-a-premillennialist/
The "pre-trib/premillennial/reconstitution of Israel" position is the only construct that fulfills ALL biblical prophecy to perfection, with no loose ends or ambiguity whatsoever.
Dispensationalism isn't Scriptural.
As I have mentioned, it proposes an intermediate period between Jesus' return and the New Heavens/New Earth.
The claim is that death is not defeated at the resurrection of the just/unjust at Jesus' return, and this is a false claim according to 1 Corinthians 15.
And no amount of wrangling Scriptures can get past that.
Additionally, the claim that the New Covenant does not apply to the Church is asinine.
In what way?
Are my claims incorrect?
All dispensationalists deny that death is decisively defeated at Jesus' return.
Many dispensationalist teachers deny that the Church is under the New Covenant. They believe it only applies to ancient Israel. I have seen dispensationalist teachers tell other pastors that they shouldn't teach this openly, though, because it is "too hard" for most members to digest. I think it's because they know that their hermeneutic would be exposed as inadequate.
Wrong. Death and sin are defeated at the rapture when we receive our immortal, incorruptible bodies.
1 Corinthians 15
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
The New Testament began with the death of the testator.
Hebrews 9
16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Is the Church under the New Covenant?
If you say yes, then you differ from other dispy teachers, as they claim it does NOT.
And that's an abominable teaching.
So, you claim that you receive your immortal, incorruptible bodies seven years prior to Jesus' return?
That's not what I Thess 4 says.
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18
13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore encourage one another with these words. (ESV)
This raises an interesting point, though..do you believe that this "rapture" happens seven years before Jesus returns, and if so, is it an audible, open event that everyone sees?
Or, does the archangel use a trumpet that is like a dog whistle? What I mean by that is that only those raptured can hear it?
That's what I've heard it compared to..a dog whistle that non-Christians can't hear.
That's not what other notable dispensationalists believe.
They do not believe the New Covenant applies to the Church, but only to Israel.
Because, that is their dispy reading of Hebrews 8.