House Divided

[Iosias]

Here is an online book entitled House Divided: The Break-Up of Dispensational Theology by Greg L. Bahnsen and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.

 

[BereanTodd]

No offense meant but of all of the possible positions I find postmil the oddest, least defensible and most unbiblical. And my feelings of theonomists are even lower than that. Bahnsen was both.

I've read some of Bahnsen's works I don't feel the need to read anything else penned by him.

 

[GLJCA]

No offense meant but of all of the possible positions I find postmil the oddest, least defensible and most unbiblical. And my feelings of theonomists are even lower than that. Bahnsen was both.

I've read some of Bahnsen's works I don't feel the need to read anything else penned by him.

Well read Ken Gentry then. His works are very convincing. He recently came to our city and several Dispys went to listen to him. They didn't leave Dispys though.

GLJCA

 

[Iosias]

No offense meant but of all of the possible positions I find postmil the oddest, least defensible and most unbiblical. And my feelings of theonomists are even lower than that. Bahnsen was both.

I've read some of Bahnsen's works I don't feel the need to read anything else penned by him.

No offense taken...I would agree with you (up to a point) but they make some good points.

Well read Ken Gentry then. His works are very convincing.

His Before Jerusalem Fell convinced me of an early date for Revelation.

 

[BereanTodd]

Well read Ken Gentry then. His works are very convincing. He recently came to our city and several Dispys went to listen to him. They didn't leave Dispys though.

GLJCA

If you plan on convincing me, there's no hope for you really. I allready went through my time of questioning it, read a great many critical works about it, actually got to the point where I considered myself amillenial, and considered switching to the Reformed Presbyterian church.

But after much reading of the Scriptures, and study, I have become convinced again (and forevermore as far as I'm concerned) of the truth of dispensational teachings.

 

[GLJCA]

If you plan on convincing me, there's no hope for you really. I allready went through my time of questioning it, read a great many critical works about it, actually got to the point where I considered myself amillenial, and considered switching to the Reformed Presbyterian church.

But after much reading of the Scriptures, and study, I have become convinced again (and forevermore as far as I'm concerned) of the truth of dispensational teachings.

I was a Dispensationalist for 40 years and I felt the same way you did. I felt like no one could change my mind concerning Dispensationalism. My father, a Southern Baptist pastor, studied eschatology diligently creating charts and teaching Dispensationalism in his church. I read Pentecost, Larkin, Ryrie, and many others, and yet when approached with questions concerning eschatology five years ago, I found that there were too many holes that Dispensationalism could not and did not address. In fact I have found that when one confronts a Dispensationalist with these holes they have no answer and most evade the questions.

I unconsciously looked at the Word of God like a patchwork quilt instead of the seamless garment that it is. All aspects of God's Word has to fit together or it ceases to be the infallible Word of God.

Today I see the New Testament as the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Jesus Christ as God's provision for the all of the Old Covenant promises to His covenant people, which are comprised of believing Jews and believing Gentiles, the remnant of God throughout the ages.

In reality that is what Paul was speaking of in Romans 11:1-5. God did not cast away His people that He foreknew. He brings that out in Rom 11: 1 ¶ I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Yet we know that God did cast away the unbelieving branches of Covenant Israel.
Rom 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
and
John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
So God did cast away someone yet it was not His people that He foreknew or else Paul would have been in error to write verse 1. Remember only the unbelieving branches were cut out of the olive tree. The believing branches, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, etc., remained in the tree. How unjust God would have been to cut the branches who were abiding in Christ by faith, out of the tree, along with the unbelieving branches who were relying on the law, sending them all to the fire. I do not serve a God who punishes someone with eternal fire and brimstone, who places all their trust in Him until the end.

I do not see two seperate entities, of Israel and the Church in scripture, which is the foundational belief of Dispensationalism. I only see one olive tree, covenant Israel, which is comprised of believing Gentiles and believing Jews, receiving the same root and fatness of the tree, that Isaac receives. I see one vine in the Old Covenant, which is Christ, where Old Covenant, circumcised of the heart, Jews abided, and now where believing Gentiles abide, in Christ. I see One People of God in Christ, extending from Old Testament into the present time. I never saw those things in Dispensationalism because they are contrary to it's teaching.

GLJCA

 

[Dispy]

Berean Todd & GLJCA:

It is quite apparent to me that you were both Acts 2 dispies. I too have problems with them. You can see 28 reasons why at: http://www.starlightresearch.com/ActsProblems.html

You two had the same or similar problems with them.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!