Question

[GrinningDwarf]

Howdy....

I was wondering what the dispensational position is on how salvation worked before the cross. Do dispensationalists hold, for instance, that under the Mosaic Covenant that the children of Israel were saved by observing the law?

Not looking for a showdown...just seeking to understand.

Thanks.

 

[Jerrysch]

Howdy....

I was wondering what the dispensational position is on how salvation worked before the cross. Do dispensationalists hold, for instance, that under the Mosaic Covenant that the children of Israel were saved by observing the law?

Not looking for a showdown...just seeking to understand.

Thanks.

No one at any time in history or in the future will be or was justified by way of observing a law. All men are justified by faith appart from any work at all. This is the clear teaching of dispensationalism and the Bible as well.

 

[GrinningDwarf]

No one at any time in history or in the future will be or was justified by way of observing a law. All men are justified by faith appart from any work at all. This is the clear teaching of dispensationalism and the Bible as well.

Cool! Just wanted to know!

What would the differences be between dispensationalism and covenant theology? Obviously, one side sees history through seven dispensations and the other sees history through two covenants, but what does that mean to dispensationalists?

One reason I'm asking...we had a guest Sunday school teacher a while ago and he was explaining the premillenial, pretrib rapture. When I brought up the possibility of other interpretations, he said something like "Well...those ideas are based upon covenant theology...and there are some major problems if you go in that direction." I never got a chance to follow that up with the obvious question...what are those major problems?


Also...can y'all recommend any good websites to learn more about dispensationalism?

Thanks again!!

 

[Easystreet]

Howdy....

I was wondering what the dispensational position is on how salvation worked before the cross. Do dispensationalists hold, for instance, that under the Mosaic Covenant that the children of Israel were saved by observing the law?

Not looking for a showdown...just seeking to understand.

Thanks.

No - from start to finish or creation to end of 1000 year kingdom it is God's grace, our faith in that Grace.

Prior to the Cross all who were saved believe what God told them. They lived it out in obedience by observing the law.

We have laws too. Just read Romans chapter 12. Doing what is right is not salvation. But having faith in God (for is specifically Jesus Christ - for them the promises God made to them) is always our part in salvation. Noah believed God - the gospel to Noah was a flood is coming do you believe me? Noah if you believe Me Build an Ark. Noah was a believer prior to the flood and whatever revelation He had of God then - Noah believed it because He was considered a righteous man.

There are a lot of things we do not know concerning the peoples during the years from the Creation up to and after the flood. But we do know that God's Grace and our faith in God who is the object of our faith saves. They did not know of Christ to our knowledge because it is not recorded in Scripture that they did.

Also there is the vague understanding of Mechazideck (sp). We are introduced to him out of the blue so to speak. Some How Some Way God had Melchazideck (sp) in the midst of their world and He was a God fearing man and type of Christ then. We can only draw form what we are told. There is room for reasonable inference and filling just don't become dogmatic on it.

Hope this helps.

Don't ever let a anti dispensationalist tell you that Dispensationalist teach more than one method of salvation. No so. Always on our part Faith in God. The question in every dispensation is do the people of that dispensation believe God.

 

[GLJCA]

No one at any time in history or in the future will be or was justified by way of observing a law. All men are justified by faith appart from any work at all. This is the clear teaching of dispensationalism and the Bible as well.

This may be your personal view but it is not held by all Dispensationalists.
Here is part of his Old Scofield notes on John 1:17 “As a dispensation, grace begins with the death and resurrection of Christ Romans 3:24-26 4:24,25. The point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the condition of salvation, but acceptance or rejection of Christ, with good works as a fruit of salvation” Scofield here is saying that legal obedience was the condition of salvation.

Dispensationalist have vacillated back and forth on this issue. Here is a quote from Dispy on this forum.
The first resurrection of prophesy, is of those OT and NT saints that were saved under the Law, and the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom."

So as you see there are many Dispensationalists under the mistaken assumption that OT saints were saved by obedience to the law, even though Paul said that no one can be justified by the law.

GLJCA

 

[Easystreet]

This may be your personal view but it is not held by all Dispensationalists.
Here is part of his Old Scofield notes on John 1:17 “As a dispensation, grace begins with the death and resurrection of Christ Romans 3:24-264:24,25. The point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the condition of salvation, but acceptance or rejection of Christ, with good works as a fruit of salvation” Scofield here is saying that legal obedience was the condition of salvation.

Dispensationalist have vacillated back and forth on this issue. Here is a quote from Dispy on this forum.
The first resurrection of prophesy, is of those OT and NT saints that were saved under the Law, and the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom."

So as you see there are many Dispensationalists under the mistaken assumption that OT saints were saved by obedience to the law, even though Paul said that no one can be justified by the law.

GLJCA

You and I read it differently I don't see either saying that. I would ask that you take all of CI Snowfield’s writhing to understand his position not just one statement. The same would apply to others too. Now that is not to say that some would differ.

You will be hard pressed to say many or most or a lot are as you say.

Quoting several statements proves little if anything at all.

I am not trying to arguer with you, just pointing out what I believe may be a miss conception of the total thinking and understanding of these men. These statements are I am sure a very small fraction of their thinking.

The better question would be "What do they mean by what they say? If what they say is re-enforced by further commentary that clearly reveals to us this is a position that goes against your post then we can all investigate it and conclude one way or the other.

Gordon

 

[Jerrysch]

Cool! Just wanted to know!

What would the differences be between dispensationalism and covenant theology? Obviously, one side sees history through seven dispensations and the other sees history through two covenants, but what does that mean to dispensationalists?



Thanks again!!

The defining elements which mark a person as a dispensationalist are 3.
1. A distinction between Israel and the Chruch
2. The use of a consistant literal (or plain) hermenunic.
3. That God's main purpose is in bringing glory to Himself.

Covenant Theology is "distinguished by the place it gives to covenants, because it represents the whole of Scripture as being covered by Covenants". Firstly the Covenant of "works" and secoundly by a Covenant of "grace". CT then understands all of the work of God thoughout history in relation to these two covenants.

Of course this is but a start, there are many more distinctions between the two systems, but this will get you started.

 

[Jerrysch]

Cool! Just wanted to know!


One reason I'm asking...we had a guest Sunday school teacher a while ago and he was explaining the premillenial, pretrib rapture. When I brought up the possibility of other interpretations, he said something like "Well...those ideas are based upon covenant theology...and there are some major problems if you go in that direction." I never got a chance to follow that up with the obvious question...what are those major problems?


Thanks again!!

Many who follow CT do not employ a consistant literal hermenunic, that is when prophecy is encountered, many abandon the literal meaning and seek to find a meaning outside of the text itself. If the Biblical text is examined in a literal way, there is no other understanding that can be learned other than a premillenial, pretrib rapture. But of course, there are those who will disagree with me!

 

[Jerrysch]

This may be your personal view but it is not held by all Dispensationalists.
Here is part of his Old Scofield notes on John 1:17 “As a dispensation, grace begins with the death and resurrection of Christ Romans 3:24-264:24,25. The point of testing is no longer legal obedience as the condition of salvation, but acceptance or rejection of Christ, with good works as a fruit of salvation” Scofield here is saying that legal obedience was the condition of salvation.

Dispensationalist have vacillated back and forth on this issue. Here is a quote from Dispy on this forum.
The first resurrection of prophesy, is of those OT and NT saints that were saved under the Law, and the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom."

So as you see there are many Dispensationalists under the mistaken assumption that OT saints were saved by obedience to the law, even though Paul said that no one can be justified by the law.

GLJCA

I would bring to your attention Chapter 6 in Charles Ryrie's Book Dispensationalism Today entitled Salvation in Dispensationalism where he goes into this issue;

"But without a doubt the primary reason for the persistance of the charge (of dispensationalism teaching more than on way of salvation) has been the fact that dispensationalists have made unguarded statements which, if they were being made in light of today's debate, would have been more carefully worded. Antidispensationalists are never quick to allow for refinement in the statement of dispensationalism, particularly if it dulls thier attack".
​

The point is that Schofield would have something to say regarding the attacks on his theology today if he were alive. Nondispensationalists were not immune to making ungarded statements either as that chapter will give evidence.

 

[Tychicum]

Many who follow CT do not employ a consistant literal hermenunic, that is when prophecy is encountered, many abandon the literal meaning and seek to find a meaning outside of the text itself. If the Biblical text is examined in a literal way, there is no other understanding that can be learned other than a premillenial, pretrib rapture. But of course, there are those who will disagree with me!

I find sadly that most find a belief structure which "feels good" ... and then they attempt to find a Hermeneutic to support it.

Completely backward to the way of proper understanding of God's Will revealed to us through His Word.

I mean if the Scripture is going to have a voice one should listen.

.

 

[Tychicum]

The point is that Schofield would have something to say regarding the attacks on his theology today if he were alive. Nondispensationalists were not immune to making ungarded statements either as that chapter will give evidence.

Scofield really did have a calling didn't he?

Today I believe we are in the final leg of the race.

Not many want to listen do they ... Not to Scofield or Chafer or Stam that's for sure.

I might even say that if one were to come back from the dead to plead the case I don't think many would listen.

Luke 16:30-31 KJV And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. (31) And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

So is it defeatist to agree with Paul ...

1 Corinthians 14:37-38 KJV (37) If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. (38) But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

Personally in this age of Apostasy ... I don't believe that it is possible for you or I to unseat many or most of the false beliefs that are out there today.

If you really want to see the awful state of Christendom today go visit the CARM.org Forums. They break it out by one Heresy per forum topic ... and there are pages of them.

God has to do it Himself if it is going to be done at all ... And I suppose that is exactly as it has been in all times past.

.