Dispensationalism-Catholic view

[canadiancatholic]

I was just wondering if the view of dispensationalism ( God "dispenses" himself differently to every age to make his word more relevant to the accorded time) is the basis of protestantism. I'm not sure whether I have this term correctly applied, but that is the gist of what I'm understanding. Does dispensation have any place within our faith or is it a man made doctrine developed outside our walls. I am told that an example of this application is the theory of a coming rapture. It wasn't applicable until the dawn of this new age (protestant reformation). If I'm in the wrong forum then please move, I just wanted this to not end up in endless debate over the true church(which tends to happen in GT). Thanks for the replies.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Dispensationalism is the belief of a minority of Protestants. Catholics don't believe in it or in the Rapture.

 

[black_rain]

When I was protestant, I attended different churches that all held very different stands on dispensationalism. It's not regarded very highly among evangelicals.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Well, in order to proove they should exist outside of the Catholic Church, they needed a [man made] tradition to show this.

That is just IMHO. And of course, if we look at it....they are doing exactly what they 'think' they are chastising the CC for.

'Making or forming' new terms. [They *think* the CC does this, although we know the Church only defines an ancient doctrine when it is held up for scrutiny]

Rapture is man made, and so is the theory that God changes.

Although I do believe that the very scriptures tell us He is unchanging.

Interesting, really.

 

[NewMan99]

Dispensationalism is a relatively new theological development. It first hit the scene when a Protestant pastor by the name of Darby (one of the "Plymouth Brethren) developed it in late 19th century.

Catholics believe in dispensations too --- BUT --- in an entirely different way than Dispensationalist Protestants do. For example, we will say that the Old Covenant was a dispensation that was followed by another dispensation in the New Covenant. They are two very broad periods of salvation history whereby God developed and revealed in the New what was hidden in the Old.

But we don't have all the various divisions in the New Covenant that Dispensationalist Protestants do.

And, we do believe in a "rapture" of sorts...but...again...not in the same way that Dispensationalists believe in one. For example, we believe that when Jesus Christ comes again (at "The Second Coming") that those who are alive in Christ (in a state of grace) will not experience death, but rather will be ushered directly into heaven. So...we do believe in a sort of rapture even if we don't use the term "rapture."

What we don't believe is that Jesus will come again, rapture up the Christians, establish a literal 1,000 year reign as King on a Throne in the new Temple in Jerusalem, after which Satan will be loosed once again for the final battle of Armageddon and finally climaxing in Christ coming (a third time?) at the end of time and vanquishing Satan and his minions into the lake of fire forever.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Thanks Newman, I never quite got the new rapture version.

 

[canadiancatholic]

Dispensationalism is a relatively new theological development. It first hit the scene when a Protestant pastor by the name of Darby (one of the "Plymouth Brethren) developed it in late 19th century.

Catholics believe in dispensations too --- BUT --- in an entirely different way than Dispensationalist Protestants do. For example, we will say that the Old Covenant was a dispensation that was followed by another dispensation in the New Covenant. They are two very broad periods of salvation history whereby God developed and revealed in the New what was hidden in the Old.

But we don't have all the various divisions in the New Covenant that Dispensationalist Protestants do.

And, we do believe in a "rapture" of sorts...but...again...not in the same way that Dispensationalists believe in one. For example, we believe that when Jesus Christ comes again (at "The Second Coming") that those who are alive in Christ (in a state of grace) will not experience death, but rather will be ushered directly into heaven. So...we do believe in a sort of rapture even if we don't use the term "rapture."

What we don't believe is that Jesus will come again, rapture up the Christians, establish a literal 1,000 year reign as King on a Throne in the new Temple in Jerusalem, after which Satan will be loosed once again for the final battle of Armageddon and finally climaxing in Christ coming (a third time?) at the end of time and vanquishing Satan and his minions into the lake of fire forever.

Thank you, this was a response I was looking for. Wasn't Darby the one who developed the rapture theory also?

 

[canadiancatholic]

Well, in order to proove they should exist outside of the Catholic Church, they needed a [man made] tradition to show this.

That is just IMHO. And of course, if we look at it....they are doing exactly what they 'think' they are chastising the CC for.

'Making or forming' new terms. [They *think* the CC does this, although we know the Church only defines an ancient doctrine when it is held up for scrutiny]

Rapture is man made, and so is the theory that God changes.

Although I do believe that the very scriptures tell us He is unchanging.

Interesting, really.

Do you know which verses say he doesn't change? This would be a useful tool in defense of our faith. Thank you for your response.

 

[anawim]

Wasn't Darby the one who developed the rapture theory also?

He may have adopted it from a Scottish woman by the name of Mary McDonald, but that has never been verified.

 

[anawim]

Do you know which verses say he doesn't change? This would be a useful tool in defense of our faith. Thank you for your response.

"For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed. ~ Mal. 3:6

Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. ~James 1:17

 

[NewMan99]

He may have adopted it from a Scottish woman by the name of Mary McDonald, but that has never been verified.

That is correct.

As for the "God doesn't change" argument, a Dispensationalist would argue that each dispensation isn't so much God changing, as it is God unfolding each era as part of His masterplan...so arguing that God doesn't change would not be an effective argument against their theology.

The two best resources that I know of would be "Will Catholics Be Left Behind" by Carl Olson (see here:
http://www.amazon.com/Will-Catholic..._bbs_sr_1/002-3681588-9170432?ie=UTF8&s=books ). This, of course, is how a Catholic can defend our faith when discussing Dispensationalism with non-Catholics.

And a VERY effective tool is one that is written by an Evangelical named Ronald Henzel (Dispensationalism is a very controversial topic among Evangelicals and many of them disagree with it as much as we do) entitled "Darby, Dualism, and the Decline of Dispensationalism" which you can see here:

http://www.amazon.com/Darby-Dualism...id=1164048481/ref=sr_11_1/002-3681588-9170432

The above two books are excellent.

Another good Catholic reference would be "The Rapture Trap" by Paul Thigpen:

http://www.amazon.com/Rapture-Trap-..._bbs_sr_2/002-3681588-9170432?ie=UTF8&s=books

And also "Rapture: The End-Times Error That Leaves The Bible Behind" by David Currie:

http://www.amazon.com/Rapture-End-T...=pd_bbs_3/002-3681588-9170432?ie=UTF8&s=books

All of these books are good and useful, especially Olson's book.

Hope that helps.

God's Peace,

NewMan

 

[anawim]

My favorite is David Currie's, but he also has a great tape set on the subject as well: http://www.catholiccompany.com/product_detail.cfm?ID=3706

 

[NewMan99]

Currie's book is great. It is more in-depth and is quite a bit bigger. It is more for someone who is really seriously studying the topic. It isn't any more difficult to read...just longer.

 

[anawim]

One thing I've noticed about Olsen's books is that he has a tendency to jump around a lot. I'm not sure if that's just his writing style, of if his manuscripts are in need a of a good editing job.

 

[NewMan99]

Really? I didn't notice that at all. I suppose different people like different styles. As for me, I thought it was a pretty effective read and I have used it extensively when dialoging with a Dispensationalist (ex-Catholic of course) friend of a friend. Our exchange went on for a few months.