Dispensationalism

[Cody02]

Any KJV Only Dispensationalists on this forum?

If so, I recommend checking out Gene Kim on YouTube. He has a lot of good teaching on rightly dividing the word of truth.

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

Aye.

 

[Willie T]

Dispensationalists

Dispensationalist = the very definition of "wrongly" dividing the word of Truth.

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

Dispensationalist = the very definition of "wrongly" dividing the word of Truth.

Actually, dispensationalism just means to dispense whenever it's used in the Bible. There's no question that God dispenses different laws and covenants to different groups of people at different times. Dispensationalism is Bible doctrine.

 

[Dave G.]

Here we go again. There are dispensations in the bible, period. God has dealt differently with man before the fall than after the fall and differently for the Jews who accepted Him from those who did not, though He won't give up on either. Certainly differently with the gentiles after Pentecost and with the addition of Paul as an apostle. These are time frames or ages in the bible which is all written for our knowledge by the way, every bit of it. That's all dispensations are though, it's not some kind of voodoo.

 

[mark kennedy]

Dispensationalism doesn't mean KJV only, they are two different issues. Dispensationalism is probably not the best standard for understanding redemptive history but it's obviously an attempt to understand it. It has it's merits but I've never found it to be particularly helpful.

 

[Willie T]

Actually, dispensationalism just means to dispense whenever it's used in the Bible. There's no question that God dispenses different laws and covenants to different groups of people at different times. Dispensationalism is Bible doctrine.

It's doctrine (teaching), but hardly "Biblical."

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

It's doctrine (teaching), but hardly "Biblical."

What are you talking about? The word "dispensation" appears in the Bible. How is that not Biblical?

"For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me." (1 Corinthians 9:17 KJV).

"That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:" (Ephesians 1:10 KJV).

"If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:" (Ephesians 3:2 KJV).

"Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;" (Colossians 1:25 KJV).

 

[mark kennedy]

It's doctrine (teaching), but hardly "Biblical."

Actually it is, the word I mean:

Dispensation (G3622 οἰκονομία oikonomia): primarily signifies "the management of a household or of household affairs" (oikos, "a house," nomos, "a law"); then the management or administration of the property of others, and so "a stewardship," Luke 16:2-4; elsewhere only in the Epistles of Paul, who applies it (Vine’s Expository Dictionary)
​

Also translated, stewardship.

 

[twin1954]

Dispensation is a word, Dispensatoinalism is a method of theology.

Dispensationalism as a theology is a grave error if not heretical.

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

Dispensationalism as a theology is a grave error if not heretical.

Can you please explain why that is?

 

[twin1954]

Can you please explain why that is?

Dispensationalism is a fairly new way to interpret the Bible. It came about in the 1800's through a dream of a women related to Darby. Darby was a Brethren pastor and leader who developed the theology. It is founded and based in Dispensational Premil eschatology. It divides the Bible and makes for two ways of salvation. It separates Jew and the church into different plans of God which is clearly against what Paul teaches. It makes most of the Old Testament irrelevant for us. It make you jump through hoops to arrive at the points they teach. It's woodenly literal interpretations misses the whole point in the Scriptures. It wrongly divides the word of truth.

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

Dispensationalism is a fairly new way to interpret the Bible.

No, it's as old as the apostle Paul, who gave the command to rightly divide scripture, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV).

It came about in the 1800's through a dream of a women related to Darby.

That's a godless lie that has been pushed for a while by a bunch of anti-dispensationalist Calvinists who can't refute the doctrine, so they have to refute it by history alone. The woman's name was Margaret MacDonald, and her dream had absolutely NOTHING to do with dispensationalism. It had nothing to do with dividing the scriptures, it had nothing to do with Israel and the Church being different, it had nothing to do with a Pre-Tribulation rapture, it had nothing to do with different plans of salvation in different ages, it had nothing to do with different dispensations or covenants or advents or raptures, it had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH DISPENSATIONALISM! I'll link you to her recorded "vision" here for you to read, as reported by a POST-TRIB ANTI-DISPENSATIONALIST, and you be the judge of it: https://www.preteristarchive.com/dEmEnTiA/1975_macpherson_incredible-coverup.html

Darby was a Brethren pastor and leader who developed the theology. It is founded and based in Dispensational Premil eschatology.

Dispensationalism (which is the principle of rightly dividing the scriptures) was already in existence from the time of Paul, as I have shown. And Premillennialism has been as old as the order of the book of Revelation. In Revelation 19, Jesus comes. In the next chapter, Satan is bound and he reigns for a thousand years AFTER HIS COMING. So the book of Revelation itself is PREMIL (i.e. Christ coming BEFORE his Millennial reign). Darby didn't invent either.

It divides the Bible and makes for two ways of salvation.

Wrong, there is only one way of salvation, Jesus Christ (John 14:16 KJV). But Jesus can dispense different methods to have his atonement applied to them. One example of this is with Adam and Eve -- their spiritual life was dependent on PURE WORKS (even the Reformed Presbyterians acknowledge this in their Westminster Confession), not by grace through faith.

It separates Jew and the church into different plans of God which is clearly against what Paul teaches.

Can you give some examples of this in the Bible?

It makes most of the Old Testament irrelevant for us.

No it doesn't, because the New Testament says it's profitable for us (2 Timothy 3:16). Dispensationalists don't throw away the Old Testament, we just don't stone sodomites or burn witches.

It make you jump through hoops to arrive at the points they teach.

We don't jump through hoops, we just "STUDY" the Bible hard (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV), whereas others don't study it.

It's woodenly literal interpretations misses the whole point in the Scriptures.

How can the point be something other than WHAT GOD SAID? Taking the Bible literally just means to take God at his word, and to believe exactly what he says is what he means and is absolute "truth" (John 17:17 KJV).

It wrongly divides the word of truth.

Can you give some actual Bible examples of this?

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

It divides the Bible

THAT'S a problem with dispensationalism? That's exactly what Paul told you to do in Bible study (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV)!

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

It divides the Bible

THAT'S a problem with dispensationalism? That's exactly what Paul told you to do in Bible study (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV)!

 

[twin1954]

Yeah, yeah, yeah "if you don't believe in Dispensationalism you don't believe the Bible." I've heard it all before. You asked I answered. I have neither the time or inclination to argue with you. Experience tells me that you will not even consider what I say and I have studied all the Dispensational arguments. It would be a pointless waste of time and effort.

 

[DeaconDean]

Any KJV Only Dispensationalists on this forum?

If so, I recommend checking out Gene Kim on YouTube. He has a lot of good teaching on rightly dividing the word of truth.

I want to tell you something.

You may find this irregular, but I was introduced to "Dispensationalism" by my grandfather. Even more amazing, he was a "Reformed Presbyterian"!

As shown, "Dispensationalism" does indeed also mean "stewardship".

Strict Dispensationalism sees each "age" progressively as marked by the individual "covenants" marked out in scripture.

Where dispensationalists and Covenant theologians disagree is the overall view. Covenant theology focuses on, and sees everything from two points. Prior to the cross, and after the cross. A "Covenant of works" that ended at the cross. And a "Covenant of Grace" that began at the cross.

Whereas Dispensationalism sees that the way God dealt with man, is seen in the covenants God made with man, up until the cross. (Innocence, etc)

I've been a dispensationalist for 43 years. But I am unlike any dispensationalist you've ever met.

To be honest, both Dispensationalism and covenant theology both has their strengths and weaknesses.

The biggest weakness of Dispensationalism is it separates, segregates the body of Christ. For example: during this "age of grace" while Jews may be saved, this age is all about the Gentiles. God's promises for Israel, the Jews, will be fulfilled during the millennial reign of Christ. Nearly all dispensationalists agree in the position that Rom. 9-11, are addressed specifically to Israel. And, they tend to see the "church" beginning at either Acts 9, or Acts 28.

I will say this, if your that convinced in the dispensational position, I suggest you spend some time in General Theology, "Dispensationalism" room.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

I want to tell you something.

You may find this irregular, but I was introduced to "Dispensationalism" by my grandfather. Even more amazing, he was a "Reformed Presbyterian"!

As shown, "Dispensationalism" does indeed also mean "stewardship".

Strict Dispensationalism sees each "age" progressively as marked by the individual "covenants" marked out in scripture.

Where dispensationalists and Covenant theologians disagree is the overall view. Covenant theology focuses on, and sees everything from two points. Prior to the cross, and after the cross. A "Covenant of works" that ended at the cross. And a "Covenant of Grace" that began at the cross.

Whereas Dispensationalism sees that the way God dealt with man, is seen in the covenants God made with man, up until the cross. (Innocence, etc)

I've been a dispensationalist for 43 years. But I am unlike any dispensationalist you've ever met.

To be honest, both Dispensationalism and covenant theology both has their strengths and weaknesses.

The biggest weakness of Dispensationalism is it separates, segregates the body of Christ. For example: during this "age of grace" while Jews may be saved, this age is all about the Gentiles. God's promises for Israel, the Jews, will be fulfilled during the millennial reign of Christ. Nearly all dispensationalists agree in the position that Rom. 9-11, are addressed specifically to Israel. And, they tend to see the "church" beginning at either Acts 9, or Acts 28.

I will say this, if your that convinced in the dispensational position, I suggest you spend some time in General Theology, "Dispensationalism" room.

God Bless

Till all are one.

I'd love to hear about your version of dispensationalism as a Calvinist. If you don't want to elaborate here, can we create at thread or exhange messages? I love to learn about theology and you appear to have a unique point of view that would teach me something of good value!

God bless you!

 

[DeaconDean]

I'd love to hear about your version of dispensationalism as a Calvinist. If you don't want to elaborate here, can we create at thread or exhange messages? I love to learn about theology and you appear to have a unique point of view that would teach me something of good value!

God bless you!

The biggest difference is in the fact that I do believe in the 7 "dispensations" as opposed to the two (maybe 3) theories of Covenantism.

Covenant of works, Covenant of Grace, and maybe Covenant of Replacement.

I do not separate Jews and Gentiles under the age of grace.

I do not accept that the preverbal stopping of God's plan for the Jews while this "Age of Grace" is underway only to be restored when the Millennial reign.

Those are the biggest differences between me and most "Dispensationalists".

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[St. Helens]

Personally, dispensationalism is a model that I didn't find particularly helpful. Just MHO

 

[DeaconDean]

Personally, dispensationalism is a model that I didn't find particularly helpful. Just MHO

A lot of ppl have trouble with it.

I don't.

I was taught "Dispensationalism" by my grandfather, who believe it or not, was a Ruling Elder, in a "Reformed Presbyterian" Church.

God Bless

Till all are one.