- Jul 21, 2018
- 1,029
- 130
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
The goals of this post are to relate the differences between non-dispensational futurism and dispensational futurism, and why neither can be justified by the Bible. In showing those differences and their deficiencies historicism is confirmed as the only eschatological model that avoids such pitfalls.
First, it must be noted that both models agree on premillennialism and eschatological futurism but differ mainly on their views of the Church and Israel.
According to classic pretribulation premillennialist Dr. Charles Ryrie, the essentials (the sine qua non) of dispensationalism commence with keeping Israel and the church distinct.[2] Non-dispensational futurists hold no such “distinction” and this agrees with their post-tribulation premillennialism. George Eldon Ladd was a non-dispensational futurist (also called historic premillennialism as the Wikipedia article conveys above) because he held no such distinction between the Church and Israel. In Ladd’s book, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, he commented on the twelve tribes in Revelation 7,
In continuity, he also commented upon the woman in Revelation 12,
As Christ testifies in Matthew 12:50, metaphorically speaking, his mother represented those who fulfill “the will of my Father which is in heaven.” In Galatian 4 Paul refers to those doing God’s will as the Jerusalem which is above, as opposed to “the children of the flesh,” who were in bondage. No doubt Paul, as an apostle to the Gentiles, supports the Church as heavenly Jerusalem, which is also affirmed in Hebrews 12:21-24.
Ladd is recognized as a non-dispensational futurist but he failed to recognize that the woman in travel in Isaiah 66 represents the Church, in contradiction to dispensationalism’s assertions that the Church was not prophesied in the Old Testament. Classic dispensationalist Thomas Ice expresses this notion as another sine qua non of dispensationalism.
This distinction struggles against the Old Testament evidence that the term Ekklēsia (translated church or congregation) is not a New Testament construct. In the Septuagint Deuteronomy 23:1 and 31:30 uses the same word we see in the NT. The concept of a covenantal assembly was well understood. Their covenantal rituals upheld boundaries and ceremonial washings to promote righteousness and purity in representing the chosen elect remnant. It is this distinction that Paul conveys in his thesis in Romans 9: “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel.”
Isaiah 66:7 identifies Zion as the true Israel but the context cannot be interpreted a precipitous event at the second advent, which is what Ice holds in his comment that prophetic fulfillment undergoes a break in this age and resumes at its end (along with the unwarranted protraction of the seventieth week). John connects the woman of heaven in chapter 12 with the woman in Isaiah 66:7 as a first advent phenomenon. In types and cryptic language, the Church is identified as the true Israel of God, the vehicle in this age by which God restores Israel by redeeming them and then sowing them in the world before the precipitous event when he gathers them and restores them to their land. This change to centrifugal worship was anticipated by Christ in John 4:21. This calling and sowing is illustrated by Christ in Matthew 13:24-30 in the parable of the wheat and the tares, which is taken from Zechariah 10.
The text maintains God hisses for Ephraim, the northern “nation” of Israel, gathers and redeems them prior to scattering them to the nations where they raise families and follow Him again. This is precisely what is illustrated in the parable of the Wheat and the Tares; it is the source of the parable, as well as Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7; and Hosea 2:14-23. It is also illustrated in the parable of the Wedding Feast. Both testaments affirm the gathering at the consummation of the Davidic kingdom is a second advent phenomenon, while the first advent is affirmed as the scattering of the sheep in the Great Commission.
Futurism and preterism assert that God offered the Davidic kingdom to the shepherds or tenants appointed to reject the cornerstone (Matthew 21:33-44). But all the major and some minor prophets foresaw that the Messiah would come and punish the shepherds and as a result, the sheep would scatter (Ezekiel 34:2; Zechariah 13:7). The former holds Christ came to establish his kingdom but repented, which violates that God is not a man, that he should repent (1 Samuel 15:29). What the major prophets saw was the history of the early Church, and the Great Commission.
The dispensationalist and preterist perception that God offered the Davidic kingdom at the first advent also has that kingdom contingent upon the “children of the flesh” in violation of Romans 9:6, 16. It is an open-theist perception. Ephraim is the “nation” that bears the fruit of the vineyard in Matthew 21:43. The prophets foretold the rejection of the stone would result in the scattering of Ephriam as a blessing to nations. Zechariah 13:7 and Matthew 13:24-30 affirm this scattering as a first advent phenomenon. It is the Great Commission. Christ’s parables are rooted in the prophecies about this age, which corresponds with the history of the Church and vindicates historicism.
1–Wikipedia, s.v. Historic premillennialism, Historic premillennialism - Wikipedia
2– Charles Ryrie, The Essentials of Dispensationalism, The Essentials of Dispensationalism – Israel My Glory
3– George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, Eerdmans Pub., 1972, 115
4–Ibid. 167
5– Thomas Ice, Signs of the Times and Prophetic Fulfillment, Signs of the Times and Prophetic Fulfillment :: by Thomas Ice
First, it must be noted that both models agree on premillennialism and eschatological futurism but differ mainly on their views of the Church and Israel.
A major difference between historic and dispensational premillennialism is the view of the church in relation to Israel. Historics do not see so sharp a distinction between Israel and the church as the dispensationalists do, but instead view believers of all ages as part of one group, now revealed as the body of Christ. Thus, historic premillennialists see no issue with the church going through the Great Tribulation, and they do not need a separate pre-tribulational rapture of some believers as the dispensational system requires.[1]
According to classic pretribulation premillennialist Dr. Charles Ryrie, the essentials (the sine qua non) of dispensationalism commence with keeping Israel and the church distinct.[2] Non-dispensational futurists hold no such “distinction” and this agrees with their post-tribulation premillennialism. George Eldon Ladd was a non-dispensational futurist (also called historic premillennialism as the Wikipedia article conveys above) because he held no such distinction between the Church and Israel. In Ladd’s book, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, he commented on the twelve tribes in Revelation 7,
John intends to say that the twelve tribes of Israel are not really literal Israel, but the true, spiritual Israel–the church.[3]
In continuity, he also commented upon the woman in Revelation 12,
The central feature of this heavenly woman is that she is the mother of the Messiah… Some commentators think she represents Mary… others Israel… It is true that Isaiah 66:7 pictures Zion as in travel to give birth to the new redeemed Israel… but this heavenly woman is mother of both of Messiah and of the actual church on earth… Therefore, it is easier to understand the woman in a somewhat broader sense as the ideal Zion, the heavenly representative of the people of God…
Paul gives us the clue to the meaning of the heavenly woman when he speaks of the Jerusalem which is above, who is the mother of the people of God on earth (Gal. 4:26). She was the mother of the true Israel in the Old Testament.[4]
As Christ testifies in Matthew 12:50, metaphorically speaking, his mother represented those who fulfill “the will of my Father which is in heaven.” In Galatian 4 Paul refers to those doing God’s will as the Jerusalem which is above, as opposed to “the children of the flesh,” who were in bondage. No doubt Paul, as an apostle to the Gentiles, supports the Church as heavenly Jerusalem, which is also affirmed in Hebrews 12:21-24.
But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel. (Hebrew 12:22-24)
Ladd is recognized as a non-dispensational futurist but he failed to recognize that the woman in travel in Isaiah 66 represents the Church, in contradiction to dispensationalism’s assertions that the Church was not prophesied in the Old Testament. Classic dispensationalist Thomas Ice expresses this notion as another sine qua non of dispensationalism.
Apart from a few exceptions, the church age is not a time of prophetic fulfillment. Instead, prophecy will be fulfilled after the rapture, in relation to God’ s dealing with the nation of Israel in the seven-year tribulation… signs relating to Israel are not being fulfilled in our day. Instead, what God is doing prophetically in our day is preparing the world or ” stage-setting” for the time when He will begin His plan relating to Israel which will then involve the fulfillment of signs and times.[5]
This distinction struggles against the Old Testament evidence that the term Ekklēsia (translated church or congregation) is not a New Testament construct. In the Septuagint Deuteronomy 23:1 and 31:30 uses the same word we see in the NT. The concept of a covenantal assembly was well understood. Their covenantal rituals upheld boundaries and ceremonial washings to promote righteousness and purity in representing the chosen elect remnant. It is this distinction that Paul conveys in his thesis in Romans 9: “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel.”
Isaiah 66:7 identifies Zion as the true Israel but the context cannot be interpreted a precipitous event at the second advent, which is what Ice holds in his comment that prophetic fulfillment undergoes a break in this age and resumes at its end (along with the unwarranted protraction of the seventieth week). John connects the woman of heaven in chapter 12 with the woman in Isaiah 66:7 as a first advent phenomenon. In types and cryptic language, the Church is identified as the true Israel of God, the vehicle in this age by which God restores Israel by redeeming them and then sowing them in the world before the precipitous event when he gathers them and restores them to their land. This change to centrifugal worship was anticipated by Christ in John 4:21. This calling and sowing is illustrated by Christ in Matthew 13:24-30 in the parable of the wheat and the tares, which is taken from Zechariah 10.
And they of Ephraim shall be like a mighty man, and their heart shall rejoice as through wine: yea, their children shall see it, and be glad; their heart shall rejoice in the LORD. I will hiss for them, and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased. And I will sow them among the people: and they shall remember me in far countries; and they shall live with their children, and turn again. (Zechariah 10:7-9)
The text maintains God hisses for Ephraim, the northern “nation” of Israel, gathers and redeems them prior to scattering them to the nations where they raise families and follow Him again. This is precisely what is illustrated in the parable of the Wheat and the Tares; it is the source of the parable, as well as Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7; and Hosea 2:14-23. It is also illustrated in the parable of the Wedding Feast. Both testaments affirm the gathering at the consummation of the Davidic kingdom is a second advent phenomenon, while the first advent is affirmed as the scattering of the sheep in the Great Commission.
Futurism and preterism assert that God offered the Davidic kingdom to the shepherds or tenants appointed to reject the cornerstone (Matthew 21:33-44). But all the major and some minor prophets foresaw that the Messiah would come and punish the shepherds and as a result, the sheep would scatter (Ezekiel 34:2; Zechariah 13:7). The former holds Christ came to establish his kingdom but repented, which violates that God is not a man, that he should repent (1 Samuel 15:29). What the major prophets saw was the history of the early Church, and the Great Commission.
The dispensationalist and preterist perception that God offered the Davidic kingdom at the first advent also has that kingdom contingent upon the “children of the flesh” in violation of Romans 9:6, 16. It is an open-theist perception. Ephraim is the “nation” that bears the fruit of the vineyard in Matthew 21:43. The prophets foretold the rejection of the stone would result in the scattering of Ephriam as a blessing to nations. Zechariah 13:7 and Matthew 13:24-30 affirm this scattering as a first advent phenomenon. It is the Great Commission. Christ’s parables are rooted in the prophecies about this age, which corresponds with the history of the Church and vindicates historicism.
1–Wikipedia, s.v. Historic premillennialism, Historic premillennialism - Wikipedia
2– Charles Ryrie, The Essentials of Dispensationalism, The Essentials of Dispensationalism – Israel My Glory
3– George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, Eerdmans Pub., 1972, 115
4–Ibid. 167
5– Thomas Ice, Signs of the Times and Prophetic Fulfillment, Signs of the Times and Prophetic Fulfillment :: by Thomas Ice
