Donations for the month of February


We have received a total of $100 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Posts: 59
Joined: April 2013
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,605
Posts50,990
Members923
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,376
Tom 3,396
chestnutmare 2,902
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,750
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,059
Top Posters(30 Days)
Pilgrim 22
Tom 20
Ruben 2
cathmg 1
Tina 1
Recent Posts
A study of the Heidelberg Catechism
by gotribe. Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:07 PM
Particular Baptists and the Nicene Creed
by Tom. Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:17 PM
Major update for the forum
by Ruben. Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:23 AM
Egalitarianism
by Pilgrim. Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:13 AM
Judge Abusing His Office
by Tom. Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:34 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Dispensationalism refutation #29844
Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:15 PM
Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:15 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
li0scc0 Offline OP
Addict
li0scc0  Offline OP
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
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


Grace is not common.
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: li0scc0] #29845
Mon Dec 12, 2005 7:45 PM
Mon Dec 12, 2005 7:45 PM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
USA
P
Peter Offline
Old Hand
Peter  Offline
Old Hand
P
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
USA
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.


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
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: Peter] #29846
Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:55 AM
Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:55 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
li0scc0 Offline OP
Addict
li0scc0  Offline OP
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
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


Grace is not common.
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: li0scc0] #29847
Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:59 AM
Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:59 AM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
USA
P
Peter Offline
Old Hand
Peter  Offline
Old Hand
P
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
USA
Quote
li0scc0 said:
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.


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
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: li0scc0] #29848
Wed Dec 14, 2005 8:34 AM
Wed Dec 14, 2005 8:34 AM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA


Reformed and Always Reforming,
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: li0scc0] #29849
Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:52 PM
Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:52 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 983
Florida
R
Robin Offline
The Boy Wonder
Robin  Offline
The Boy Wonder
R
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 983
Florida
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

Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: J_Edwards] #29850
Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:39 AM
Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:39 AM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
USA
P
Peter Offline
Old Hand
Peter  Offline
Old Hand
P
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
USA
Quote


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


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
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: Peter] #29851
Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:35 PM
Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:35 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
li0scc0 Offline OP
Addict
li0scc0  Offline OP
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
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).


Grace is not common.
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: Robin] #29852
Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:37 PM
Thu Dec 15, 2005 1:37 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
li0scc0 Offline OP
Addict
li0scc0  Offline OP
Addict
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 421
South Dakota
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


Grace is not common.
Re: Dispensationalism refutation [Re: Peter] #29853
Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:09 PM
Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:09 PM
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
Quote
Boanerges said:
Quote


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

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="" />


Reformed and Always Reforming,

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 16 guests, and 124 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
robertolang, SmallFry, drewk, patrice, Robert1962
923 Registered Users
Shout Box
February
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
Today's Birthdays
Curt
Popular Topics(Views)
702,205 Gospel truth
Page Time: 0.050s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 2.8921 MB (Peak: 3.1995 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-02-19 14:24:34 UTC