Is "Christian Zionism" an Oxymoron?

[BABerean2]

Yes - the people who deny the literal acceptance of explicitly stated prophecies are unanimous in saying these prophecies have been fulfilled. That is really like saying that the Democrats are unanimous in agreeing that Republicans stink.

I have given you hard, indisputable facts, that these lands are not desolate, empty of inhabitants, but are in truth, actually populated districts. And you answer with a list of people who claim that the prophecies that they would lie desolate forever have indeed been fulfilled.

Modern Dispensational Theology is built upon ignoring the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34 which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and upon the Dispensationalist's interpretations of the Old Testament.

Their claims to a future change in covenants, even though the New Covenant is "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20, and a return to animal sacrifices for sin, even though Christ is the final sacrifice for sin throughout the New Testament, should cause all of us to ignore claims of "hard, indisputable facts".


Former Dispensationalist Jerry Johnson:

.

 

[jgr]

Yes - the people who deny the literal acceptance of explicitly stated prophecies are unanimous in saying these prophecies have been fulfilled. That is really like saying that the Democrats are unanimous in agreeing that Republicans stink.

I have given you hard, indisputable facts, that these lands are not desolate, empty of inhabitants, but are in truth, actually populated districts. And you answer with a list of people who claim that the prophecies that they would lie desolate forever have indeed been fulfilled.

So a DTS alumnus lied. Imagine that.

Actually, you're right. I'd forgotten that Indiana Jones was there.

 

[BABerean2]

 

[Biblewriter]

I am not going to waste 55 minutes watching another ill informed person make claims that, although have they been widely reported, have been conclusively proven to be false.

 

[BABerean2]

I am not going to waste 55 minutes watching another ill informed person make claims that, although have they been widely reported, have been conclusively proven to be false.

History lessons are often painful, especially if they shatter our viewpoint of the past.

.

 

[Biblewriter]

History lessons are often painful, especially if they shatter our viewpoint of the past.

.

That is most certainly true. So why is it that you consistently refuse to admit that it has been conclusively proven that your opinion about the history of Dispensationalism is completely incorrect.

 

[BABerean2]

That is most certainly true. So why is it that you consistently refuse to admit that it has been conclusively proven that your opinion about the history of Dispensationalism is completely incorrect.

Did some before Darby use the word "dispensation"? Yes.

Did some before Darby believe the Jews would one day be restored to the Middle East ? Yes.

Did some before Darby claim that the Church might be removed before the Second Coming? Yes.


Did some before Darby claim that modern Jews would come to salvation outside of the Church? No.

There is no doubt that Darby adopted the "Secret Rapture" doctrine from the Irvingites, no matter how vigorously Darby apologists such as yourself deny it.

There is no doubt that Darby divided scripture into that for the Church and that for Israel.
It was his greatest contribution to the doctrine.

There is no doubt that Darby came to America and was the greatest salesman for the doctrine.

There is also no doubt that Edward Irving used the word "dispensation" 13 times on one page of his preliminary discourse that accompanied his English translation of the book "Coming of Messiah..." by the Jesuit Manuel Lacunza.
There is no doubt that Irving presented doctrine from the book at the Albury Conference and according to your team-mate Dr. Charles Ryrie, Darby attended at least one of those conferences.

Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf

.

 

[Biblewriter]

Did some before Darby use the word "dispensation"? Yes.

Not just “some,” but very, very, many before Darby, ranging from some of the very oldest surviving Christian commentaries on prophecy no less than 40 writers from the 1500s, 1600s, and 1700s.

Did some before Darby believe the Jews would one day be restored to the Middle East ? Yes.

Again, not just "some," but many, including some from ancient times and more than 20 from the 1500s AND 1600S.

Did some before Darby claim that the Church might be removed before the Second Coming? Yes.

Not “might,” but “would.” This again included some truly ancient writers, and others from later times, including at least a dozen from the1600s and 1700s.

Did some before Darby claim that modern Jews would come to salvation outside of the Church? No.

This is a willful attempt to misrepresent the doctrines of J. N. Darby, who very clearly taught that no one would ever come to salvation outside of faith in the blood which the Lord Jesus shed at Calvary.

There is no doubt that Darby adopted the "Secret Rapture" doctrine from the Irvingites, no matter how vigorously Darby apologists such as yourself deny it.

To prove this, it would be necessary to prove that Darby was wholly unaware of any of the more than a dozen who taught this long before Irving or even Lacunza.

There is no doubt that Darby divided scripture into that for the Church and that for Israel.
It was his greatest contribution to the doctrine.

Have you analyzed the writings of the almost four dozen other writers before Darby who taught Dispensational concepts, to know that none of them ever taught this doctrine?

There is no doubt that Darby came to America and was the greatest salesman for the doctrine.

“A great,” yes, “the greatest,” questionable.

There is also no doubt that Edward Irving used the word "dispensation" 13 times on one page of his preliminary discourse that accompanied his English translation of the book "Coming of Messiah..." by the Jesuit Manuel Lacunza.

And there is no doubt that Irenaeus, whose work Darby also read, used this same word more that 80 times, well over one and a half thousand years before Lacunza was born.

There is no doubt that Irving presented doctrine from the book at the Albury Conference and according to your team-mate Dr. Charles Ryrie, Darby attended at least one of those conferences.

Darby made zero effort to hide the fact that he had attended some of these conferences. He also made zero attempt to hide the fact that he was wholly disgusted with Irving and everything he stood for. But he openly stated respect for William Lowth, who taught these doctrines before Lacunza was born.

Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf
.[/QUOTE]
There can be zero doubt that the information in this video completely false. And by your own admission, you personally have the proof that it is false.

 

[jgr]

Not “might,” but “would.” This agan included some truly ancient writers, and others from later times, including at least a dozen from the1600s and 1700s.

Let's have some names of recognized defenders of the faith from the 1600's and 1700's, and what they had to say.

 

[Biblewriter]

Let's have some names of recognized defenders of the faith from the 1600's and 1700's, and what they had to say.

The weasel word "recognized" is here used in the same way that "peer reviewed" is used by those that want to reject all arguments against evolution and global warming. Even as those who defend evolution and global warming refuse to approve any arguments against their theories, and thus they deny all such arguments "peer review" status, even so, those who reject Dispensationalism reject those who teach it as not "recognized defenders of the faith."

But the truth is, that you could hardly get a more widely recognized defender of the faith than William Lowth, who in the early 1700s published a series of commentaries on the Old Testament books of prophecy. His series was the most widely circulated work of this type in his day. And even a hundred years later, J. N. Darby called him "the calm and judicious Lowth." Much of what he wrote sounded much like it might have been written by Darby or his close friend and associate, William Kelly.

 

[BABerean2]

But the truth is, that you could hardly get a more widely recognized defender of the faith than William Lowth, who in the early 1700s published a series of commentaries on the Old Testament books of prophecy. His series was the most widely circulated work of this type in his day. And even a hundred years later, J. N. Darby called him "the calm and judicious Lowth."

For those who want to know the true history of modern Dispensational Theology, the DVD "Left Behind or Led Astray" is based upon the historical written record of the time.

Darby apologists will continue to deny the recent history of their doctrine. They will continue to use the word "lie", when the truth is revealed.

..............................................................

I was shocked to hear a few days ago the claim that the New Covenant revealed by Christ at the Last Supper in Matthew 26:28, is not really the "everlasting covenant" found in Hebrews 13:20.

We were told that it will eventually be replaced by another covenant which will go back to animal sacrifices for sin.
This is a claim that would be considered "heretical" by many modern Christians.

And we were assured that this is the truth based not on the New Testament text, but on one person's interpretation of the Old Testament.

This is no better than John Hagee's "Dual Covenant Theology", which is based on John Hagee's personal interpretation of the Old Testament.

.

 

[Biblewriter]

For those who want to know the true history of modern Dispensational Theology, the DVD "Left Behind or Led Astray" is based upon the historical written record of the time.

Darby apologists will continue to deny the recent history of their doctrine. They will continue to use the word "lie", when the truth is revealed.

..............................................................

I was shocked to hear a few days ago the claim that the New Covenant revealed by Christ at the Last Supper in Matthew 26:28, is not really the "everlasting covenant" found in Hebrews 13:20.

We were told that it will eventually be replaced by another covenant which will go back to animal sacrifices for sin.
This is a claim that would be considered "heretical" by many modern Christians.

And we were assured that this is the truth based not on the New Testament text, but on one person's interpretation of the Old Testament.

This is no better than John Hagee's "Dual Covenant Theology", which is based on John Hagee's personal interpretation of the Old Testament.

.

We have already produced HARD PROOF that the claims presented in this video are almost all completely incorrect. The fact that these claims were first made over a hundred years ago does not change that fact. The disheartening thing is that the man who keeps posting this disinformation has admitted, in this forum, that he personally has some of the documents that prove these claims are incorrect. Yet he continues to post them.

And along with this, he is also willfully misrepresenting the doctrines being presented by myself and other Dispensationalists.

 

[jgr]

The weasel word "recognized" is here used in the same way that "peer reviewed" is used by those that want to reject all arguments against evolution and global warming. Even as those who defend evolution and global warming refuse to approve any arguments against their theories, and thus they deny all such arguments "peer review" status, even so, those who reject Dispensationalism reject those who teach it as not "recognized defenders of the faith."

But the truth is, that you could hardly get a more widely recognized defender of the faith than William Lowth, who in the early 1700s published a series of commentaries on the Old Testament books of prophecy. His series was the most widely circulated work of this type in his day. And even a hundred years later, J. N. Darby called him "the calm and judicious Lowth." Much of what he wrote sounded much like it might have been written by Darby or his close friend and associate, William Kelly.

"Christian Leaders of the 18th Century" by J.C. Ryle contains biographies of eleven Christian leaders, including John Wesley and George Whitefield, who "shook England from one end to another".

Who of these publicly endorsed William Lowth's eschatology?

 

[Biblewriter]

"Christian Leaders of the 18th Century" by J.C. Ryle contains biographies of eleven Christian leaders, including John Wesley and George Whitefield, who "shook England from one end to another".

Who of these publicly endorsed William Lowth's eschatology?

This is wholly inconsequential.

But as a matter of fact, here is what Wikipedia says about his works:

"His first published work was a ‘Vindication of the Divine Authority of the Old and New Testaments,’ London, 1692, a defence of the inspiration of holy scripture against the attacks of Jean Le Clerc. A second edition of the ‘Vindication,’ with a dissertation on the objections to the Pentateuch then current, was published in 1699. In 1708 he brought out ‘Directions for the profitable Study of Holy Scripture,’ a shortwork which went through many editions."

William Lowth - Wikipedia

The work for which Lowth is best known is his ‘Commentary on the Prophets,’ originally published in separate portions between 1714 and 1725, and afterwards collected in a folio volume as a continuation of Bishop Simon Patrick's ‘Commentary on the Earlier Books of the Old Testament;’ it was frequently reprinted, together with the commentaries of Daniel Whitby, Richard Arnald, and Moses Lowman on the New Testament. Its tone is pious but cold; the exegesis is simple, direct, and brief. The commentary was praised by Bishop Richard Watson and by William Orme. [2]

The editions of Clemens Alexandrinus by John Potter, of Josephus by John Hudson, and of the early ecclesiastical historians by William Reading, were enriched with notes by Lowth, and other scholars received help from him. He was a correspondent of Edward Chandler during his controversy with Anthony Collins the deist.[

 

[BABerean2]

And along with this, he is also willfully misrepresenting the doctrines being presented by myself and other Dispensationalists.

Did you claim that God will eventually put a different covenant in place, which will revert to animal sacrifices for sin?

.

 

[Biblewriter]

Did you claim that God will eventually put a different covenant in place, which will revert to animal sacrifices for sin?

.

That is a gross misrepresentation of what I said.

 

[jgr]

This is wholly inconsequential.

But as a matter of fact, here is what Wikipedia says about his works:

"His first published work was a ‘Vindication of the Divine Authority of the Old and New Testaments,’ London, 1692, a defence of the inspiration of holy scripture against the attacks of Jean Le Clerc. A second edition of the ‘Vindication,’ with a dissertation on the objections to the Pentateuch then current, was published in 1699. In 1708 he brought out ‘Directions for the profitable Study of Holy Scripture,’ a shortwork which went through many editions."

William Lowth - Wikipedia

The work for which Lowth is best known is his ‘Commentary on the Prophets,’ originally published in separate portions between 1714 and 1725, and afterwards collected in a folio volume as a continuation of Bishop Simon Patrick's ‘Commentary on the Earlier Books of the Old Testament;’ it was frequently reprinted, together with the commentaries of Daniel Whitby, Richard Arnald, and Moses Lowman on the New Testament. Its tone is pious but cold; the exegesis is simple, direct, and brief. The commentary was praised by Bishop Richard Watson and by William Orme. [2]

The editions of Clemens Alexandrinus by John Potter, of Josephus by John Hudson, and of the early ecclesiastical historians by William Reading, were enriched with notes by Lowth, and other scholars received help from him. He was a correspondent of Edward Chandler during his controversy with Anthony Collins the deist.[

I have no doubt that Bro. Lowth was a true believer, and was the source of many commendable contributions to the faith.

But unless you can produce evidence to the contrary, there is no record of general acknowledgement, acceptance, or endorsement of his eschatology.

 

[Biblewriter]

I have no doubt that Bro. Lowth was a true believer, and was the source of many commendable contributions to the faith.

But unless you can produce evidence to the contrary, there is no record of general acknowledgement, acceptance, or endorsement of his eschatology.

And what does that have to do with - anything?

 

[jgr]

And what does that have to do with - anything?

Exactly. His eschatology was a personal conviction with no wider influence.

 

[Biblewriter]

Exactly. His eschatology was a personal conviction with no wider influence.

That is an absolute and completely unfounded assumption on your part. As I noted earlier, this was published as a part of what was unquestionably the most widely circulated series of Bible commentaries from the first half of the eighteenth century.