Donations for the month of December


We have received a total of $140 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Anthony C.
Anthony C.
NJ/PA
Posts: 192
Joined: May 2016
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,549
Posts50,772
Members921
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,309
Tom 3,320
chestnutmare 2,868
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,748
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,057
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 28
Pilgrim 21
Recent Posts
Presuppositional Apologetics
by Tom. Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:42 PM
Adam created holy, so how could he fall?
by Pilgrim. Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:40 PM
Christmas
by Pilgrim. Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:01 AM
Key teaching of Dispys is Gnostic
by PerpetualLearner. Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:11 PM
Glorious Bach
by goldenoldie. Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:46 AM
Nothing New Under the Sun?
by PerpetualLearner. Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:25 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#27740 - Sat Sep 03, 2005 12:54 PM Is Dispensationalism a Heresy?  
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 351
Henry Offline
Enthusiast
Henry  Offline
Enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 351
The Great White North, Eh!
This came up on the "most dangerous heresy" thread in the open forum, so I decided to see if we could get a discussion going on it. Is dispensationalism a heresy?

Keep in mind it's a broad term. While I think every one here would repudiate classical "extreme" dispensationalism (although the question of heresy still stands) I don't think I'm the only one here who finds themselves somewhere on the shelf between the book ends of dispensationalism and covanent theology. i.e. there's progressive, new covanent theology, etc. etc. etc.

So, what sayeth thee?


(Latin phrase goes here.)
#27741 - Sat Sep 03, 2005 4:11 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Henry]  
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Wes Offline
Needs to get a Life
Wes  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Northwest Indiana, USA
Quote
Henry said:

This came up on the "most dangerous heresy" thread in the open forum, so I decided to see if we could get a discussion going on it. Is dispensationalism a heresy?

So, what sayeth thee?


Since heresies are self-chosen doctrines not emanating from God (2 Pet. 2:1) dispensationalism defenately falls in that category.

Quote
Critiques of Dispensationalism

Dispensationalism is a system of biblical interpretation formalized in the nineteenth century by John Nelson Darby and later popularized by the publishing of the study Bible of C. I. Scofield and the establishment of Dallas Theological Seminary by Lewis Sperry Chafer. It is the foundation of what is known in eschatological studies as "pre-tribulational premillenialism" and involves the division of history into (usually) seven distinct periods of time known as "dispensations". Twentieth century writers such as John Walvoord, Dwight Pentecost, and Charles Ryrie brought the doctrines of Dispensationalism into mainstream scholarship, which are often summarized by Ryrie's famous "sine qua non", i.e., his statement of the three primary tenets of the system. These are: 1) a clear distinction between Israel and the Church, 2) literal interpretation of Scripture, and 3) the glory of God as the primary goal of history. We find only the third of these principles to be valid. As stated above, God's glory is clearly the driving force behind all things .... We believe there is one people of God, rooted in the Abrahamic Covenant, united in Christ, and consisting of both Jew and Gentile alike. - Christonomy.com



Wes


When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died, my richest gain I count but loss and pour contempt on all my pride. - Isaac Watts
#27742 - Sat Sep 03, 2005 10:06 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Henry]  
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 30
BibleRon Offline
Newbie
BibleRon  Offline
Newbie

Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 30
Round Lake Beach, Ill. 60073
Does it affect your salvation ? Then it is a "heresy". If not then it is "error". My pastor is post-trib Pre-trib to him is error not heresy. To me they are both error except "Amill", like me.

It boils down to one question, Do you see a difference between Israel and the Church? To answer your question dispy is error not heresy. Unless of course you talk to John Gerstner.

Last edited by Pilgrim; Sat Sep 03, 2005 10:15 PM.

Protected by the power of God Through Faith........1Peter1:5
#27743 - Sun Sep 04, 2005 4:48 AM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Wes]  
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 551
john Offline
Addict
john  Offline
Addict

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 551
Eastern US
Quote
Wes said:

Since heresies are self-chosen doctrines not emanating from God (2 Pet. 2:1) dispensationalism defenately falls in that category.

Wes


Wes,

I'm not whether or not dispensationalism is a heresy or not. There are a lot different forms of it. It may be that some forms of it are and some are not. I guess it would be better if we could define a little more precisely what we have in mind when we say dispensationalism.

I do think your definition of heresy, as BibleRon pointed out, is overly broad. By your definition, any theological error would seem to be heresy since errors would not be emanating from God. In that case, we would all be heretics. Maybe we should discuss the definition of heresy a little more too so we don't go arguing around each other due to different definitions of the same word.

John

Last edited by john; Sun Sep 04, 2005 4:49 AM.
#27744 - Sun Sep 04, 2005 1:58 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: BibleRon]  
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Wes Offline
Needs to get a Life
Wes  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Northwest Indiana, USA
Ron,

We may disagree on the distinction between "heresy" and "error" but dispensationalism distorts the teaching of God's Word. Even though millions of evangelical Christians are attracted to dispensationalism, the system is fraught with distortion, error, and even absurdity. The errors are not insignificant. They deal with major topics such as Christ, redemption, and history.

Dispensationalism - A Reformed Evaluation by Ligon Duncan.

Quote
Major distinctions between Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism

Now, letís look then systematically at some differences between dispensationalism and Covenant Theology. And if you can picture two columns, with Dispensationalism on one side and Covenant Theology on the other side. What I am going to try and do is give you a contrast between classic Dispensationalism and classic Covenant Theology. And again, I do it, having already told you that you will find variations on these views in Dispensationalism and you may even find some variation on some of these views by Covenant Theologians, but I am trying to generalize in order to help you see the distinction. Many times I will have people say, ďI have a hard time explaining the differences between Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology.Ē I am giving these to help you understand.

First of all, Dispensationalists may be an Arminian or four point Calvinists, but Dispensationalists are almost never five point Calvinists. The point that they drop out, of course, is limited atonement. Covenant Theologians are, of course Calvinists by definition, of the five point variety. Covenant Theology, if it enforces anything, it enforces the Calvinistic doctrine of Limited Atonement. If Covenant Theology does anything, it sets in context a full orbed Calvinist doctrine of Particular Redemption.

Secondly, Dispensationalists speak in terms of a literal interpretation of the Bible. This is a major rhetorical thing that you hear in discussion with Dispensationalist friends. ďWe interpret the Bible literally.Ē Of course, the implication being that you donít. We interpret the Bible literally, you donít. You do something else to it. Whereas Covenant Theologians would argue, ĎWe interpret the Bible literally, but, we believe that the New Testament interprets the Old Testament.Ē We believe that the New Testament is the hermanutical manual for the Old Testament. And Dispensationalists are suspicious of that. When you say that the New Testament must interpret the Old Testament, Dispensationalists get a little bit edgy, because they feel you are about to spiritualize something that the Old Testament has said for them very clearly. So that is a fundamental difference. The Covenant Theologian believes the New Testament has the final word as the meaning of that passage, whereas the Dispensationalists tends to want to interpret the Old Testament and then go to the New Testament and attempt to harmonize the particular teaching of the New Testament with their previous interpretation of that Old Testament passage, rather than allowing the New Testament fundamental hermaneutical control.

In a classic example of this, Scoffield himself tells you that the most important passage in the Bible, from a Dispensational perspective is Amos chapter 9. Well, of course, Amos chapter 9 is interpreted in Acts chapter 15, but the interpretation of Amos chapter 9, that is given in Acts chapter 15 is diametrically opposed to the central principle of Dispensationalism. So how does the Dispensationalist deal with that? Well, he gives you his ďliteral interpretationĒ of Amos 9 and then simply attempts to harmonize the teaching of Acts 15 with his previous literal interpretation of Amos 9, whereas the Covenant Theologian says no, ďJames tells you what Amos 9 means in Acts chapter 15, and therefore, Jamesí interpretation must exercise all hermenutical control even when you are doing your own original exegesis of Amos 9.Ē Because if James says that is what Amos 9 means, and James is speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit recorded in Acts chapter 15, then that is what Amos 9 means. So you see a fundamentally different approach to Old Testament and New Testament interpretation.

Thirdly, Dispensationalists do not accept the Protestant idea of the analogy of faith., that ďScripture interprets Scripture.Ē We find it in The Westminster Confession, you will find it in all of the Protestant confessions, and again, it gets back to that previous point that I was making. Dispensationalists are dubious about that principle, because they think that it is a way to spiritualize away literal prophecies in the Old Testament. And, very frankly, if you have classic Dispensational friends, they will suspect you as being just a little bit liberal, because you spiritualize away literal prophecies. Even if you say you believe in inerrancy, in authority, and inspiration, there will be a concern that you are hermeneutically actually spiritualizing away the meaning of Scripture. So they do not accept the analogy of faith.

Thirdly, on the Covenant Theology side, of course, we accept the analogy of faith. Scripture interprets Scripture. And for the Covenant Theologian, the New Covenant always has the final word as to the meaning of the Old Covenant passage. It doesnít mean that you donít start with the original context, and that you donít bother yourself about original intent, it just means that you recognize from a biblical theological standpoint that later revelation, by definition, controls the final Systematic Theological understanding of earlier revelation.

Fourth, for the Classic Dispensationalist, Israel always means the literal physical descendants of Jacob. For the Covenant Theologian, Israel may mean the literal physical descendants of Jacob, or it may mean spiritual Israel which may be a subset of literal physical Israel, or it may actually be larger than the subset of literal physical Israel. It could refer to Gentiles as well. And that, is of course, is precisely the point that Dispensationals must argue against

Fifth, Dispensationalists say that Galatians 6:16, where Paul uses the phrase the Israel of God actually means physical Israel alone. However, Covenant Theologians tend to argue that Israel of God in Galatians 6:16 is a reference to spiritual Israel, paralleling it with Paulís other statements, for instance, in Galatians 3:29, Romans 2:20-28, which we read today, Romans 9:6 and Philipians 3:3.

Sixthly, for Dispensationalists, God has two peoples with two separate destinies: Israel with an earthly destiny, and the Church with a heavenly destiny. The Covenant Theologian, God has always had only one people. And though there is a sense in, however, views the church as a post Pentecost phenomenon, understands there is also a sense in which the Church is simply the people of God in all ages.

Seventh, for the Dispensationalists, the Church began at Pentecost, not before. The people of God in the Old Testament were Israel, while the people of God in the New Testament are the church. Seventh on the Covenant Theology side, the church began with Adam, and of course, reaches its fulfillment and culmination in the New Testament. Covenant Theologians would point to the passages like Acts 7:38 where Stephen speaks about what? He is speaking of the Church in the wilderness, when he is actually speaking of Israel in the wilderness. .

Eighth, according to classic Dispensationalism, the Church was not prophesied about in the Old Testament. There is no mention of the church in the Old Testament. It was a mystery until the New Testament. For Covenant Theologians, there are many Old Testament prophecies that speak of the Church.

Ninth, all Old Testament and prophesies about Israel are for the literal Israel, not for the Church. For the Dispensationalists, all Old Testament prophecies are for Israel, for physical Israel or for the literal Israel, but not for the church. For a Covenant Theologian, some Old Testament prophecies pertain to literal Israel, and some pertain to a spiritual Israel.

Tenth. The Church. For the Dispensational side, the Church is a parenthesis in Godís program for the ages. It is a temporary thing in the flow of history. You have heard the phrase The Great Parenthesis, which is used to the time when Messiah came and the Jews shockingly rejected Him. This actually thwarted Godís plan, because the original plan was for Messiah to come and set up a kingdom in Israel, but oops, the Jews rejected Him. At that point the prophetic clock stopped and we entered into the period of the Gentiles, the Great Parenthesis. That is a period about which there was no prophecy in the Old Testament. At the end of the period of the Great Parenthesis, the end of the time of the Gentiles, as the Dispensationalists interpret that section in Romans chapter 11, the Church is removed. That is the rapture. Then the prophetic clock starts ticking again, and Godís dealings with Israel resume.

And by the way, that gives you a clue as to why a pre tribulation rapture is so important for consistent classical Dispensationalism, because you have to get rid of Gentile believers in the program of God, before you can get on with the work that God is doing with literal physical earthly Israel. And that is why mid-trib and post-trib Dispensationalism does not work; because you are mixing up Godís dealings with the church and through earthly Israel. So, pre tribulational rapturist functions in Dispensationalist eschatology to remove the Church so that Godís program for Israel can resume. You get the Church out of the way before the tribulation, and then things start happening amongst the Jews. By the way, this stuff is hot on the market again. The Tim LaHaye, Left Behind novels are out, and I guarantee people in your congregations are reading them. I donít care where you are going, where you are attending, I guarantee you there are some people there that are reading those novels and they are really old, classic dispensationalism where some people disappear one day and others are left behind.

On the other hand, for Covenant Theologians, the Church is the culmination of Godís saving purposes for the ages. The Church is Godís great masterpiece. It is the bride of Christ, the body of Christ.

Eleven. For Dispensationalism in its classic form, the main heir to Abrahamís covenant was Isaac and literal Israel. The main heir to Abrahamís covenant was Isaac and literal Israel. The Covenant Theologian understands that the main heir to Abrahamís covenant was Christ and spiritual Israel; and spiritual Israel is all who have faith in Him.

Twelve. For Dispensationalism, of course, there is no covenant of redemption within the Trinity. There is no intertrinitarian covenant. For Covenant Theology, however, there is an intertrinitarian covenant which effects election.

Thirteen. For Dispensationalists, there was no Covenant of Works with Adam in the Garden. Whereas, Covenant Theology believes that God made a conditional covenant of works with Adam as representative for all his prosterity.

Fourteen. Furthermore, for Dispensationalism, there was no Covenant of Grace with Adam. Whereas for Covenant Theology, God made a Covenant of Grace with Christ and His people including Adam.

Fifteenth, for Dispensationalism, Israel was rash to accept the Covenant at Mt. Sinai. You remember we read that Scoffield said, ďThat was a big mistake. The children of Israel should have said, ĎWe donít want law, we want grace.íĒ For Covenant Theology, Israel didnít have a choice as to whether to accept the covenant arrangement at Sinai. It wasnít an option.

Sixteenth. For Dispensationalism, the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31 is for literal Israel. The New Covenant of Jeremiah 31 was for literal Israel and is not fulfilled in Luke 22:20. For the Covenant Theologian, the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31 is the same as the New Covenant spoken of by the Lord Jesus in Luke 22. And both are for spiritual Israel.

Seventeen. For classic Dispensationalists, Godís program in history is mainly through separate dispensations. And for Covenant Theologians, Godís program in history is mainly through related and progressive covenants. So naturally you would expect Dispensationalism to stress what? Discontinuity in redemptive history, while Covenant Theology stresses continuity, although that is not an absolute for either.

Eighteen. As we have mentioned before, some Dispensationalists have argued that salvation was by works in the Old Testament, whereas Covenant Theology argues that no man has been saved by works since the fall. Salvation is by grace.

Also, nineteenth, many Dispensationalists teach that the nature of Old Testament faith is different from the nature of New Testament faith. The nature of Old Testament and New Testament faith is different. Whereas Covenant Theologians argue that all those who have ever been saved, have been saved by faith in Christ as their sin bearer, though that has been progressively revealed with greater fullness as God unfolded His plan of redemption.

Twentieth. Classic Dispensationalists will argue that the Old Testament sacrifices were not recognized by the Old Testament saints as Gospel types. They were only seen as such in retrospect. Whereas Covenant Theologians will argue that the Old Testament believers believed in the Gospel of the Messiah as sin bearer through the sacrifices their types and prophecies.

Twenty-one. Dispensationalists argue that the Holy Spirit only indwells New Testament believers; He did not indwell Old Testament believers. And He will not indwell believers after the rapture. And of course, the Covenant Theologian argues that there is no such thing as a believer who is not indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

Twenty-second. Dispensationalists teach that Jesus made an offer of the kingdom to literal Israel, but Israel rejected it and so the kingdom was postponed. Covenant Theologians teach that Jesus of course proclaimed the kingdom of heaven, which from the outset was a spiritual kingdom, and though it was rejected by many Jews, it was also accepted by many Jews and Gentiles alike.

Twenty-third. Dispensationalists teach that Old Testament believers are not in Christ. They are not part of the body or bride of Christ. That is the Dispensational view. On the Covenant Theology side, believers in all ages are in Christ.

Twenty-fourth. Dispensationalists teach that the law has been abolished for believers in the New Covenant. Or, should I put it this way, for believers in the church age. And some will go as far as to argue that the Sermon on the Mount is not for Christians. The Sermon on the Mount is for the kingdom age, and so we can only indirectly learn from the Sermon on the Mount. In contrast, the Covenant Theology teaches that the law continues to have three uses in the New Covenant: to restrain sin, to lead to Christ, and to instruct Christians in godliness. Those are the three uses of the law.

Twenty-five. Dispensationalists teach that Old Testament laws are not in effect unless they are repeated in the New Covenant or in the New Testament. And of course, Covenant Theologians teach that the Old Testament moral law remains in effect in the New Covenant, though the civil and ceremonial laws have been abrogated.

Twenty-six. For the Dipsensationalists, the millennium is the kingdom of God. For Covenant Theologians, the kingdom of God is much broader than merely the millennium. The church is its institutional form, and Covenant Theologians are usually amillennial or post millennial.

Twenty-seventh. Dispensationalists believe that Old Testament animal sacrifices will be restored in the millennium, whereas Covenant Theologians believe that the Old Testament sacrifices were fulfilled in Christ and have been abolished forever.

And finally, classic Dispensationalists teach that David will reign on the millennial throne in Jerusalem in fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. And Covenant Theologians teach that Christ is reigning on the throne and His saints will rule under Him and the new earth.



Wes


When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died, my richest gain I count but loss and pour contempt on all my pride. - Isaac Watts
#27745 - Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:29 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: BibleRon]  
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
Peter Offline
Old Hand
Peter  Offline
Old Hand

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
USA
Quote
BibleRon said:
Does it affect your salvation ? Then it is a "heresy". If not then it is "error". My pastor is post-trib Pre-trib to him is error not heresy. To me they are both error except "Amill", like me.

It boils down to one question, Do you see a difference between Israel and the Church? To answer your question dispy is error not heresy. Unless of course you talk to John Gerstner.


If your talking to John Gerstner you have a line of communication that isn't open to most. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bigglasses.gif" alt="" />

However, regarding Dispensationalism it is definitely a gross error however, I doubt that I would refer to it as a heresy. As Keith Mathison's book states it divides the people of God and teaches doctrines that are IMHO disastrous for the church.


Peter

If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself. Augustine of Hippo
#27746 - Mon Sep 05, 2005 5:39 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Peter]  
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 591
Adopted Offline
Addict
Adopted  Offline
Addict

Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 591
Washington State
Boanerges,

I'm afraid I have to disagree in this respect.

How does one define "heresy"?

If it is defined by its effect on the salvation and understanding of the Gospel by others, in my opinion it is heresy.

Dispensationalism, in effect, posits a salvation aside for the Jew due to (assumed) OT promises to the physical nation of Israel. It (dispensationalism) disregards the Mosaic covenant of obedience to the law, which required perfect obedience on BOTH sides of the covenant (In which Jesus Alone fulfilled). The question remains: What were the Jews chosen for? I think this would be answered in this forum, by most, in that they were chosen to bring the OT Scripture and the Messiah (Jesus) into this world for all believers. It is my belief that this dispensational heresy presently excuses and RELIGIOUSLY FAVORS the unbelief of the Talmudic and secular zionist Jew. This political favor is entrenched by tens of millions of Arminian and pre-millennial dispensationalist, "Christian" Americans.(Thanks, in part, to some 80 million copies of the "Left Behind" books)

What I have just said may be proved by the fact that more than a half of ALL U.S. foreign aid has gone to Israel (billions upon billions) for the last many, many years. I think it is obvious (and I'm not going to argue) that there IS a biased and politically correct (and politically entrenched) view of who is the "bad guy" in the Middle East war(s). This favoritism was well entrenched before 9/11.

A good share of this money has bought tanks and guns that enforce a multi-millennial hatred of the Jew for the Palestinian (and of course, it takes two to make a battle).

Does dispensationalism result in murder, war, and hatred?
I think all one need do is read the headlines or watch the U.S. military march and die in the Middle East. I guess it could well be summed up by the dispensational and Arminian heretic Jerry Falwell who loves to say; "He who fights against the Jew, fights against God". (He says this from his Lear Jet which was donated as a gift to him by the nation Israel)

All of the above should make a thoughtful person wonder about the wisdom (spiritual and secular) in the forced and terrorist facilitated establishment of the modern state of Israel in the first place.

Lets see now, what was it that Luther and Calvin said, ----something about "Justification by Faith Alone"? I may be wrong but it is my belief that this includes the Jew as well as the Moslem.

It is therefore my belief that pre-millennial dispensationlism due to its denial of the Gospel and murderous outcome is a heresy of the very worst and deadliest kind.

Denny

Roms 3:22-24


Denny

Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." [John 6:68]
#27747 - Mon Sep 05, 2005 6:12 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Adopted]  
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 351
Henry Offline
Enthusiast
Henry  Offline
Enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 351
The Great White North, Eh!
Denny,

Your comments are well taken. I'm curious what you would say to someone who upholds that all people of all times (including OT Jews) are justified only by faith, and yet maintains that there is some sort of future for Israel as a ethnic people? (i.e. some sort of progressive dispensationalism.) Would you call that heresy?


(Latin phrase goes here.)
#27748 - Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:29 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Adopted]  
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 88
jadeitedrake0 Offline
Journeyman
jadeitedrake0  Offline
Journeyman

Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 88
dallas, TX

What I have just said may be proved by the fact that more than a half of ALL U.S. foreign aid has gone to Israel (billions upon billions) for the last many, many years. I think it is obvious (and I'm not going to argue) that there IS a biased and politically correct (and politically entrenched) view of who is the "bad guy" in the Middle East war(s). This favoritism was well entrenched before 9/11.

A good share of this money has bought tanks and guns that enforce a multi-millennial hatred of the Jew for the Palestinian (and of course, it takes two to make a battle).

Does dispensationalism result in murder, war, and hatred?
I think all one need do is read the headlines or watch the U.S. military march and die in the Middle East. I guess it could well be summed up by the dispensational and Arminian heretic Jerry Falwell who loves to say; "He who fights against the Jew, fights against God". (He says this from his Lear Jet which was donated as a gift to him by the nation Israel)

All of the above should make a thoughtful person wonder about the wisdom (spiritual and secular) in the forced and terrorist facilitated establishment of the modern state of Israel in the first place.


...can you please clarify the above statement...

It seems to connote that Israel is a state which was established via terroristic means and the resons why U.S. is giving it aid is because the dispensational heresy is previlent w/ in our society. Also the fact that we are in Iraq, has nothing to do w/ some brutal dictator who mass-murdered people and supported terrorism but its because our policies are influenced by dispensationalism.

...I sure do hope that my interpritation is wrong...

#27749 - Mon Sep 05, 2005 9:36 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Wes]  
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 88
jadeitedrake0 Offline
Journeyman
jadeitedrake0  Offline
Journeyman

Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 88
dallas, TX
Here's my question... Wes, if you were a pastor, would you excommunicate a member of your congregation (give him the entire "give him up to Satan" treatment) if you found out that he became a dispensationalist?

#27750 - Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:09 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: jadeitedrake0]  
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Wes Offline
Needs to get a Life
Wes  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Northwest Indiana, USA
Quote
jadeitedrake0 said:

Here's my question... Wes, if you were a pastor, would you excommunicate a member of your congregation (give him the entire "give him up to Satan" treatment) if you found out that he became a dispensationalist?


When you say, "if he became a dispensationalist" I'd like to know what he was before. This would help me to know why he's so confused.

If he were a member of my church he'd probably have difficulty with the preaching and teaching ministries which promote Calvinism and Covenantalism. If he were inclined toward dispensationalism he'd probably be motivated to leave on his own and join some free-will Baptist church. However, if he chose to stay and was willing to learn I'd spend time with him to explain the errors which dispensationalism teach.


Wes


When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died, my richest gain I count but loss and pour contempt on all my pride. - Isaac Watts
#27751 - Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:22 PM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Wes]  
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 88
jadeitedrake0 Offline
Journeyman
jadeitedrake0  Offline
Journeyman

Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 88
dallas, TX
I may not be correct in this, but I always thought a heresy is something you excommunicate people for...

Lets say, he was an A-mill. before he became confused (very confused). If he held some ministry position w/ in congregation (music, sunday school, secretary, etc, etc) what action would you suppose be correct to take? Would you remove him from ministry? Would you advise him to refrain from the Lord's Supper?

(dont get this the wrong way, to me it seems to be a very complicated issue...)

#27752 - Tue Sep 06, 2005 8:12 AM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Henry]  
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 591
Adopted Offline
Addict
Adopted  Offline
Addict

Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 591
Washington State
Henry,

Of course there are multiple forms of dispensationalism. However, I believe that the form that I described is the worst(Rapture ready, Scofield and Co.).

For those who believe in a future "ethnic" set aside for the Jew alone I would just say that they are seriously mistaken. I say this because I believe that Paul said to the effect that there is one Body one Spirit and one baptism. I highly recommend a very good book on this issue by O. Palmer Robertson entitled "The Israel of God".

I know that my comments were "hard" and were going to raise eyebrows.

Denny

Roms 3:22-24


Denny

Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." [John 6:68]
#27753 - Tue Sep 06, 2005 8:14 AM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: jadeitedrake0]  
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Wes Offline
Needs to get a Life
Wes  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,856
Northwest Indiana, USA
In my church if he held a ministry position and was advocating dispensationalism he'd be removed from his office because he would be teaching a doctrine contrary to what we believe. As to what steps of discipline to take that would be a matter for the elders to decide not the pastor. Much of this would depend on the individual and on whether he's just ignorant or disrupting and argumentative.

If he were a lay person who held no ministry position in the church he probably be tolerated unless he made this a matter of contention and disrupted the fellowship of believers. We (and most churches) have members who hold to various views on a variety of topics which are not in agreement with Reformed confessions because they are still learning the basics. You can't remove a student for not understanding good biblical exegesis but you can't tolerate a leader who teaches heresy.


Wes


When I survey the wondrous cross on which the Prince of Glory died, my richest gain I count but loss and pour contempt on all my pride. - Isaac Watts
#27754 - Tue Sep 06, 2005 9:06 AM Re: Is Dispensationalism a Heresy? [Re: Wes]  
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 351
Henry Offline
Enthusiast
Henry  Offline
Enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 351
The Great White North, Eh!
Quote
If he were a lay person who held no ministry position in the church he probably be tolerated unless he made this a matter of contention and disrupted the fellowship of believers. We (and most churches) have members who hold to various views on a variety of topics which are not in agreement with Reformed confessions because they are still learning the basics. You can't remove a student for not understanding good biblical exegesis but you can't tolerate a leader who teaches heresy.


Wes,

Let me ask a question<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/evilgrin.gif" alt="" />- if there was a lay person in your church who held no ministry position, who denied the deity of Christ, was sure of his belief, but didn't bother others, would he be tolerated as a student who simply didn't understand good biblical exegesis?


(Latin phrase goes here.)
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Who's Online Now
1 registered members (goldenoldie), 18 guests, and 100 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
drewk, patrice, Robert1962, Ron, billmcginnis
921 Registered Users
Shout Box
December
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Popular Topics(Views)
666,201 Gospel truth
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.055s Queries: 16 (0.004s) Memory: 2.7287 MB (Peak: 3.0411 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-12-16 05:18:52 UTC