The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Dispensationalism refutation

I wanted to get some thoughts as to various means of refuting Dispensationalism.

Although there are numerous means of so doing, one of the most convincing arguments that led me OUT of dispensational theology was the New Testament writers' use of the Old Testament. For example, the author of Hebrews use of the Old Testament, in Chapter 1 of Hebrews, would be considered arbitrary and even audacious if we did not realize that 1) the entire Old Testament is God's Word and 2) that Jesus Christ is very God and 3) the Old Testament testifies to Jesus.

A Dispensationalist would agree with #1 and #2, but would disagree with #3. The use of the Old Testament in the New Testament entirety, and especially in Hebrews Chapter 1, seems to refute the Dispensationalist hermeneutic.

Steve C

The problem my friend is that the term dispensationalism has grown meaningless until you define what you mean. There are so many different flavors that your refutations may mean nothing to certain dispies because they don't define themselves under that particular type.

Classical premillenial dispensationalism, dispensationalism in the thread of Scofield, Walvoord, Ryrie, Thomas, Fruchtenbaum. NOT the progressive dispensationalist line of Blaising and Block which is hardly dispensationalism as is traditionally taught.

By Dispensationalism I mean the traditional 4 Point Calvinistic teaching of the theologians given above, with
1) the primary purpose of the Scriptures being the Glory of God.
2) the church being unknown and not spoken of in Old Testament times
3) the separation between Israel and the Church
4) the parenthesis nature of the church
5) the pretribulational rapture with a postribulational return of Christ (7 year tribulation, either determined from the rapture or from the ratification of the peace agreement with Antichrist and Israel, etc.).
6) Literally 1000 year earthly millenium

The above is the traditional definition of Dispensationalism.

Steve

The problem is Steve that the dispensationalism of Scofield and the dispensationalism of Walvoord and Ryrie are actually two different variations. Walvoord and Ryrie actually corrected some of the egregious errors that Scofield proposed. One of the major problems with dispensationalism is that it is in a constant state of flux. There is no "set" form.

I always point to the Lord's preaching the gospel entirely from the Old Testament on the road to Emmaus. In that exchange, we are told the He told His disciples "from Moses and the prophets, all the Scripture said concerning Himself."

Imagine preaching the gospel entirely from the Old Testament! I know of very few who do that today, but Jesus and the Apostles preached the gospel entirely from the Old Testament. The fact of the single thread of Christ's work, prefigured in all the law and the prophets, proves Dispensationalism wrong. The bible, from beginning to end, is a book about Jesus!

That, and of course, Ephesians chapter two, which I think all by itself destroys Dispensationalism by describing the Lord's work in having "made the two (Jew and Gentile) into one," and Paul's emphasis that the children of Abraham are not descendants by geneaolgy but by FAITH.

A former Dispensationalist,
Robin

Oh sure take the easy way out. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bigglasses.gif" alt="" />

They are highly similar. When I erred in Dispensationalism I would have considered myself a Ryrian (is that a term?) dispensationalist but 99% of what was in Scofield's Notes was "valid" for one who was Ryrian. Don't forget Scofield corrected some of his own errors between his 1909 and 1917 "Bibles" (i.e. his notes).

Jesus preaching on the road to Emmaus DEFINITELY is a fantastic refutation, and fits nicely in with my original post - the teaching of the OT in the NT and the use of the NT writers AND Jesus' use of the NT refutes Dispensational thought.

A Dispensationalist can explain Ephesians 2 - although it is not the greatest explanation.

Thanks Robin!
Steve

I have discussed Dispensationalism here so much I am afraid of becoming a worn out record. I guess it is time to become a CD.

I hope everyone gets this <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />