I would like to know everyone’s thoughts on Dispensationalism…is it a true biblical concept? Feel free to provide evidences for any view. Thank you.
Discussion
17 comments
-
Dispensationalism maintains that God’s plan of salvation.is different in different times a places. Yet the firsts Gospel was heard by Adam and Eve, and that promise renewes at verious times and places but always came down.to the promise ilof the flgict of salvation mediated through means God dictated, though admiiedly often misunderstood because the purpose of law was often
misunderstood. Paul in Romans points that out. -
Maybe Beeean Approach is best.
-
Dispensationalism
Dispensationalism is an approach to biblical interpretation which states that God uses different means of administering His will to people during different periods of history, usually seven chronologically successive periods. It attempts a literal interpretation of Scripture with a premillennial and pre-tribulation rapture view. It sees Israel and the church as distinct bodies.
The seven main dispensation are:Innocence (Genesis 1-3)
Conscience (Genesis 3-8)
Civil Government (Genesis 9-11)
Promise (Genesis 12-Exodus 19)
Law (Exodus 20-Acts 2:4)
Grace (Acts 2:4-Revelation 20:3)
Millennial Kingdom (Rev. 20:4-6)
Compare to the Covenant Theology’s understanding of God’s administration of His will and grace.
-
Dispensationalism
Dispensationalism is an approach to biblical interpretation which states that God uses different means of administering His will to people during different periods of history, usually seven chronologically successive periods. It attempts a literal interpretation of Scripture with a premillennial and pre-tribulation rapture view. It sees Israel and the church as distinct bodies.
The seven main dispensation are:Innocence (Genesis 1-3)
Conscience (Genesis 3-8)
Civil Government (Genesis 9-11)
Promise (Genesis 12-Exodus 19)
Law (Exodus 20-Acts 2:4)
Grace (Acts 2:4-Revelation 20:3)
Millennial Kingdom (Rev. 20:4-6)
Compare to the Covenant Theology’s understanding of God’s administration of His will and grace.
-
It is a teaching introduced by Darby in the late 1800s… placed in the notes of the Scofield Bible in the 1900s…
-
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYFBLkHop2anlJ9wrDXdhugr95AJ3dMKA
You might like this its realy well put together and explains more than just dispensationalism. Its ab church history.
I used to be dispensationalist but when I started studying for myself and not what I was thought I left dispensationalism. I could not line it up with scripture with hermeneutics audiences relevance and the original languages.
-
Verses Covenant Theology?
-
It’s an incredibly new theology. Like, from around 1850. That alone makes it suspect to me. ?♀️
-
All doctrines must be checked. If it is in the Bible, then its right.
-
I dont agree with all darby and larkin teaching. But i agree in the Bible about pre trib.
-
Dispensationalism is not found in scripture
-
Most comments about dispensationalism you will find are by detractors. Unfortunately the word next to compromiser is the second biggest swear word used by Christians of Reformed persuasion. Historically, Modern Dispensationalism was the Step child of the Industrial Revolution. With ideas gravitating towards naturalistic theories for the explanation of the existence of the Bible, a Calvinistic polemic became one explanation of progressive revelation. Popularizer John Nelson Darby whose personality didn’t win many converts to the Movement, but evangelist D. L. Moody helped enthusiastically popularize it within the Bible Institute Movement. Two varieties of it existed though eventually one beat out the other. The first was harmonistic approach to Covenant Theology. This was advocated by James Hall Brookes. A student of his Cyrus Ingerson Scofield developed the idea of dispensationalism being added tests to demonstrate total depravity. Brooks taught that the deposits of truth were the Biblical Covenants themselves. Scofield broke from his old pastor and this idea. He maintained that inherent to the idea of the dispensation was the test being independently related to the Biblical covenants. His views were widely circulated in the 1909 and 1917 editions of the Scofield Reference Bible, and the Scofield Correspondence Bible Course, promulgated by the Moody Bible Institute and one time by Philadelphia School of Bible.
During the 1930’s and the Modernist-Fundamentalist Controversy Separatist Presbyterians became divided over the role eschatology of the Scofield Reference Bible was at variance with the Westminster Standards. One group thought absolute incompatability, what became the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. The other minority party the Bible Presbyterians felt that premillennialism was the issue and eschatological freedom to hold to the premillennialism of the dispensational Scofield Bible without any seriously articulated reconciliation between the Westminster Standards and Scofieldianism.
The problem of dispensationalism inherently in the Scofield System was the radical dusjuncture of law from grace. Dr. Buswell noted that similar problem within Covenant Theology of radical dusjuncture between the Covenants of Works and Grace on the part of some of its adherents.
The various annotated Study Bibles which have come out of the Dispensational movement have been helpful but in some circles have taken on Confessional status.
Apparently during the 1930’s,
a new expression of A millennialism was the latest thing in vogue. Denial of chiliasm was tantamount to denial of the bodily resurrection of our Lord on the part of some in the PCUSA. For others the toleration of Scofield Bibles was the very doctrinal indifference which led to the Auburn Affirmation.
Both sides red herrings raised by the other group led to the separate Orthodox and Bible Presbyterian Churches. Other issues were involved not germaine to this discussion.
If one can adopt the broader concept of Progressive Revelation, then take the best from dispensationalism. The chief problem within the movement is the tendency to make the principle a separate theology. This friendly criticism was raised by Dr. Frank E. Gaebelien whose father had been an associate of Scofield. The unbridled attempts at claiming the early church fathers championed dispensational methodology relies heavily upon equivocation of the terms meaning dispensation.
Is the deposit of household truth the biblical covenants themselves or artificially derived independent interdependent tests placed over the Biblical covenants?
Reformed theology has embraced the former position. Classical Dispensationalists the latter.
The problem is one of definition. The problem is one of system. The problem is one of systematization.
I hold to Covenants:
Redemption, Restitution, Redeemer: (Subdivided)
Adamic, Noahiac, Abrahamic,
Mosaic, Davidic, ReNewed Covenants. Elect: The Seed of David OT Israel, NT Church, the Spiritual seed of Abraham both.
A very complex issue.
Hope this is of help from a perspective that neither swares at or by dispensationalism, but is not antagonistic with it either.
Kate Marie Wendi -
Yes
-
The only dispensational idea I’ve studied is the claim that everyone after the resurrection is saved by grace through faith, and everyone prior was not. And it’s false.
Salvation by grace through faith is the only way anyone has ever been saved. Everybody who got saved in the Old Testament did so by trusting in Christ.
-
Dispensationalism???
Comments