• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Is "Christian Zionism" an Oxymoron?

Discussion in 'Eschatology - Endtimes & Prophecy Forum' started by BABerean2, Nov 17, 2017.

Tags:
  1. jgr

    jgr Well-Known Member Supporter

    +609
    Non-Denom
    So whom did it influence, that we know of?
     
  2. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    I do not answer this inane argument due to any thought that it is even an appropriate argument, but rather to clearly demonstrate the fallacy of the basic point you are obviously trying to make, that the notions of William Lowth and similar writers can be safely ignored because no one of note ever paid any attention to them. This is a logical and spiritual fallacy, but it is also incorrect.

    As I mentioned earlier, the commentaries of William Lowth were praised by Richard Watson, who was the Anglican Bishop of Llandaff from 1782 to 1816, and who belonged to an influential group of followers of Edmund Law that included also John Hey and William Paley.

    Lowth’s commentaries were also praised by William Orme, who was a Scottish Congregational minister, famous as a biographer of Richard Baxter and other nonconformist figures.

    Lowth’s commentaries on prophecy began to be published in 1714, 13 years before the death of Isaac Newton, the famous mathematician, who also, late in his life, penned views similar to Lowth, which were published after his death.

    Two years after Lowth began his publications of prophecy, the Presberitian minister John Abernathy (who sowed the seeds of the struggle in which, under the leadership of Dr Henry Cooke, the Arian and Socinian elements of the Irish Presbyterian Church were thrown out,) published similar beliefs. And these ideas were again taken up four years after the series was complete by Nathaniel Markwick, Vicar of Somerset.

    Twenty years after Lowth’s series was completed, his notions were taken up by Samuel Collet, Rector of Temple Michael, and Chaplain to his Grace, Josiah, Lord Archbishop of Tuam. And seven years after that by Thomas Newton, Bishop of Bristol.

    These notions are found in the many hymns by Isaac Watts and Charles Westly.

    And later, they were again taught in 1772 by the Norwich Baptist Grandtham Killingworth and Joseph Priestly, minister of Mill Hill Chapel, (which was one of the oldest and most respected Dissenting congregations in England.) And again they were taught in 1788 by Thomas Reader, in 1792 by John Braille, the Dissenting Minister of Newcastle, and in 1796 by James Bichino, the Baptist Pastor of Newbury.

    And again, my personal knowledge of this greatly influential writer came as a result of J. N. Darby citing his writings. So we know he influenced Darby, who influenced Schofield, who influenced much of the modern evangelical movement.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  3. BABerean2

    BABerean2 Newbie Supporter

    +1,843
    Christian
    Married
    Can you provide any text written by those above which claims that modern Jews will come to salvation outside of the Church?

    .
     
  4. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    Can you provide ANY text written by ANY Dispensationalist of ANY time (other than John Hagee, whom most of us consider an heretic,) which says this?
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  5. BABerean2

    BABerean2 Newbie Supporter

    +1,843
    Christian
    Married
    Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological, had the following to say about the difference between Israel and the Church.

    “The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.”
    Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107.

    Chafer states that, ‘Israel is an eternal nation, heir to an eternal land, with an eternal kingdom, on which David rules from an eternal throne,’ that is, on earth and distinct from the church who will be in heaven.”
    Lewis Sperry Chafer. Systematic Theology. 1975. Vol. IV. pp. 315-323.

    John Walvoord, another prominent voice of Dallas Theological stated…

    "...it is an article of normative dispensational belief that the boundaries of the land promised to Abraham and his descendants from the Nile to the Euphrates will be literally instituted and that Jesus Christ will return to a literal and theocratic Jewish kingdom centred on a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. In such a scheme the Church on earth is relegated to the status of a parenthesis.”
    John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question.1979, p. 25

    Those who promote the Two Peoples of God doctrine claim that the Church will be removed from the planet seven years before the Second Coming of Christ.

    Many of the older "classic" Dispensationalists claimed that God would then go back and deal with modern Israel under the Old Covenant system.

    In the notes below from the Scofield Reference Bible we have the claim that there will be a Gospel during the tribulation period that is not the Gospel of Grace.

    ...............................................................
    From the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible:

    Revelation 14:6

    gospel
    Gospel. This great theme may be summarized as follows:
    I. In itself, the word Gospel means good news.
    II. Four forms of the Gospel are to be distinguished:
    (1) The Gospel of the kingdom. This is the good news that God purposes to set up on the earth, in fulfilment of the Davidic Covenant: (2Sa_7:16): a kingdom, political, spiritual, Israelitish, universal, over which God's Son, David's heir, shall be King, and which shall be, for one thousand years, the manifestation of the righteousness of God in human affairs.

    (See Scofield) - (Mat_3:2).

    Two preachings of this Gospel are mentioned, one past, beginning with the ministry of John the Baptist, continued by our Lord and His disciples, and ending with the Jewish rejection of the King. The other is yet future (Mat_24:14) during the great tribulation, and immediately preceding the coming of the King in glory.

    (2) The Gospel of the grace of God. This is the good news that Jesus Christ, the rejected King, has died on the cross for the sins of the world, that He was raised from the dead for our justification, and that, by Him, all that believe are justified from all things. This form of the Gospel is described in many ways. It is the Gospel...
    "of God" (Rom_1:1) because it originates in His love;
    "of Christ" (2Co_10:14) because it flows from His sacrifice, and because He is the alone Object of Gospel faith;
    of the "grace of God" (Act_20:24) because it saves those whom the law curses;
    of "the glory"; (1Ti_1:11); (2Co_4:4) because it concerns Him who is in the glory, and who is bringing the many sons to glory; (Heb_2:10);
    of "our salvation" (Eph_1:13) because it is the "power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth"; (Rom_1:16);
    of "the uncircumcision" (Gal_2:7) because it saves wholly apart from forms and ordinances of "peace" (Eph_6:15) because through Christ it makes peace between the sinner and God, and imparts inward peace.

    (3) The everlasting Gospel. (Rev_14:6). This is to be preached to the earth-dwellers at the very end of the great tribulation and immediately preceding the judgment of the nations (Mat_15:31). It is neither the Gospel of the kingdom, nor of grace. Though its burden is judgment, not salvation, it is good news to Israel and to those who, during the tribulation, have been saved; (Rev_7:9-14); (Luk_21:28); (Psa_96:11-13); (Isa_35:4-10).

    (4) That which Paul calls, "my Gospel" (Rom_2:16). This is the Gospel of the grace of God in its fullest development, but includes the revelation of the result of that Gospel in the outcalling of the church, her relationships, position, privileges, and responsibility. It is the distinctive truth of Ephesians and Colossians, but interpenetrates all of Paul's writings.

    III. There is "another Gospel" (Gal_1:6); (2Co_11:4) "which is not another," but a perversion of the Gospel of the grace of God, against which we are warned. It has many seductive forms, but the test is one -- it invariably denies the sufficiency of grace alone to save, keep, and perfect, and mingles with grace some kind of human merit. In Galatia it was law, in Colosse fanaticism (Col_2:18); etc. In any form, its teachers lie under the awful anathema of God.

    angel
    (See Scofield) - (Heb_1:4).

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

    The only way to make the doctrine work is by ignoring the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and is specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.

    You have made the claim that the New Covenant is important in your doctrine, but have failed to produce anything you have written about the New Covenant.

    I have never heard a sermon on the New Covenant from a Dispensational preacher.
    Why?
    Because an understanding of the New Covenant of Christ destroys modern Dispensational Theology.


    .
     
  6. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    And not even one of these, said what you said. My point is, and has been for a long time now, that you are wresting our words, and attempting to make it appear that we teach things we do not teach. And the sad part of this is, that you continue to do this, even after you have had your error very clearly and explicitly detailed to yourself, and you just continue your willful misrepresentations.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  7. BABerean2

    BABerean2 Newbie Supporter

    +1,843
    Christian
    Married
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  8. jgr

    jgr Well-Known Member Supporter

    +609
    Non-Denom
    “The dispensationalist believes that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.”
    Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dispensationalism (Dallas, Seminary Press, 1936), p. 107.

    There is no way to misrepresent that statement.

    Chafer deliberately distinguished between Judaism and Christianity.

    How is that defensible?
     
  9. jgr

    jgr Well-Known Member Supporter

    +609
    Non-Denom
    Here is the list from J. C. Ryle's "Christian Leaders of the 18th Century" who "shook England from one end to another":

    George Whitefield
    John Wesley
    William Grimshaw
    William Romaine
    Daniel Rowland
    John Berridge
    Henry Venn
    Samuel Walker
    James Hervey
    Augustus Toplady
    John Fletcher

    Ryle was the first Anglican bishop of Liverpool. His book on the subject was the first, and is considered among the best.

    None of the names in his list appear in yours.

    There would appear to be some difference between Ryle's recognition of influence, and yours.
     
  10. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    This is a wholly unjustified conclusion. The "dual Covenant" theology allegedly endorsed by John Hagee does not even resemble Dispensationalism.
     
  11. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    And that is supposed to prove - what? It is an inane argument, neither logically or spiritually significant. You seem to have lost sight of the original subject of this conversation, which was the falsehood of the allegation that J. N. Darby got his ideas from Lacunza, through Irving. What has been, not alleged, but PROVEN, is that these same ideas were widespread in England in the centuries leading up to the time of J. N. Darby.

    And I did not even mention the English writers of the early nineteenth century who published more than en years before either Darby or Irving wrote anything, and before Lacunza's work had been translated into English. The most notable of these was Lewis Way, who presented a fully developed Dispensationalism, and who clearly taught a rapture before the great tribulation in 1815, and William Cunninghame, who clearly taught a rapture before the great tribulation in 1817.
     
  12. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    It is not only defensible, but is demonstrable in scripture. But that is distinctly different from the way this doctrine has been wrested into a false accusation.
     
  13. BABerean2

    BABerean2 Newbie Supporter

    +1,843
    Christian
    Married
    No. The original subject of this conversation is about Christian Zionism.

    When presented with the unBiblical doctrines taught at Dallas Theological Seminary by Chafer and Walvoord, you are now attempting to change the conversation.

    Is the Church really a parenthesis in God's plan of dealing with Israel?

    Are there really Two separate plans of God, based on genealogy?

    Are Israelites God's eternal earthly people and the Church is God's eternal heavenly people, and never the twain shall meet, as Larkin used to say?

    The only way you can make Chafer and Walvoord's argument work is by 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.

    .
     
  14. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    Yes
    Yes
    Yes

    The only way you can make Chafer and Walvoord's argument work is by 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.[/quote]

    This is simply and completely incorrect. The only way you can deny these, is to deny that the scriptures actually mean what they explicitly say.

    But that does not even resemble the way you wrest these doctrines in your posts.

    Your problem is that you fail to distinguish between earthly promises of blessings on this earth made to an physical people group, and heavenly promises of blessings in heaven made to a spiritual people group.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2017
  15. jgr

    jgr Well-Known Member Supporter

    +609
    Non-Denom
    Claims aplenty.

    No actual quotes, or where or when they appeared.

    We await.
     
  16. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    I told you when they appeared. I will give you the actual statements and citations in another thread, D.V.
     
  17. BABerean2

    BABerean2 Newbie Supporter

    +1,843
    Christian
    Married
    And how much Israelite DNA is required to distinguish between this physical group of people and everyone else?

    Should we start passing out DNA test kits at the church-house door so we can make sure we can recognize who is in this group?

    If I have an Israelite ancestor, how much land do I get in the middle east?


    1Ti_1:4  Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.


    Tit_3:9  But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

    .
     
  18. Biblewriter

    Biblewriter Senior Member Supporter

    +786
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    CA-Conservatives
    Even if you happen to have 100% Israelite DNA, since you claim to belong to the Lord Jesus Christ, YOU won't get ANY land in the middle east. If your claim to belong to the Lord Jesus is true, then at that time you will be with Him, which is FAR better. But if your claim is only an empty profession, at that time you will be in hell. This is true of every person who professes His name in this day, regardless of their genetic makeup.

    When the Antichrist comes, every person who has rejected "the love of the truth" will be turned over to believe his lie. And ALL of them will be destroyed with the brightness of His coming.

    The scriptures EXPLICITLY state that, after Messiah comes, He will bring all Israel back to the land and purge all the rebels from their midst. Then ALL the rest of them will repent and trust in Jesus. Then He will settle them in the land, dividing it up as He EXPLICITLY stated in Ezekiel 47 and 48.

    This is NOT interpretation, mine or that of anyone else, but is EXPLICITLY stated.

    You continually quote many scriptures to prove that this will not happen. But not even one of these scriptures actually says what you claim it means. You INTERPRET some scriptures to say that what God EXPLICITLY said in other scriptures, is not true.

    And the determination of who will qualify as an Israelite will be made by the Lord himself, not by any man.
     
  19. jgr

    jgr Well-Known Member Supporter

    +609
    Non-Denom
    That will include Judas and those responsible for Christ's death. Be ready to greet them in heaven.

    Zechariah 12
    10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
     
  20. BABerean2

    BABerean2 Newbie Supporter

    +1,843
    Christian
    Married
    Let me see if I understand what you are saying...

    Christians will be with Christ in the future.

    And after the Second Coming, Christ will return people of a certain DNA sequence to a piece of land in the Middle East and they will then be with Christ.

    If we are with Christ and they are also with Christ at that point, how are there two separate Peoples of God?

    Will we be segregated into two separate groups, based on race ?

    Your first statement above cannot be correct, because you said that Israelites who accept Christ will not get any land and then later you said Israelites will accept Christ and they do get land.
    You cannot have it both ways.
    Which is it?


    .
     
Loading...