Questions for Dispensationalists

A. Have dispensationalists not been consistently wrong on prophecy (see links below)?

http://againstdispensationalism.blogspot.com/2009/04/obituary-of-dispensationalism.html

http://publisherscorner.nordskogpublishing.com/2009/01/is-it-time-for-doomsday-or-for-building.html

1. Is there anywhere in the New Testament that explicitly supports the land promise made to Israel is yet to be fulfilled? If the land promise to Israel is forever and unconditional, why does God say it is conditional in Deuteronomy 28? Did Israel not receive all of the land promised to Abraham in Joshua 21:43-45; 23:14-15?

2. If God has two different plans for Jews and Gentiles, why does Paul say there is no longer a distinction (Romans 10:12; Galatians 3:28; Colossians 3:11)?

3. Is the gospel not the salvation for everyone who believes, both Jew and Gentile (Romans 1:16)?

4. If Israel and the Christian church are two different groups of people who have two separate covenants, and the hope of Israel is the resurrection (Acts 23:6, 24:14-15, 26:6-8), why is it taught that Christians will experience any type of resurrection, being that it is only for Israel (http://bible.org/article/contemporary-interpretative-problems-%E2%80%94-resurrection-israel)?

5. Do not the following passages further confirm that the New Israel (New Jerusalem) does not mean a literal restored nation of Israel: Matthew 21:43; Romans 2:28-29, 9:6, 10:12; Galatians 6:15-16; Philippians 3:3; Colossians 3:11; Hebrews 8:8, 8:13; 1 Peter 2:9-10? Who is the bride in Revelation 21:2â€”is it not the church? (Did Christ marry a physical structure in the sky?) Is it not clear in Hebrews 12:22-24 that the heavenly Jerusalem is related to the new covenant, and not a physical city in the sky? In 1 Peter 2:9-10 is Peter not applying Old Testament terms for Israel to the church, asserting the continuity between Old Testament Israel and the New Testament churchâ€”representing them as one people of God?

6. Were not the Jews as a nation rejected (Matthew 8:8-13, 21:33-46, 22:1-8, 23:31-38; John 8:37-47; Romans 9:30-10:4; Romans 11:7)?

7. Was the Israel of God (Galatians 6:15-16) not given to the those individuals, either Jew or Gentile, who believe (Matthew 3:9; Romans 2:28-29; Galatians 3:28-29, 4:24-31; Hebrews 8:13, 12:12-24; 1 Peter 2:5-10; Revelation 3:9)?

8. When the Jews rejected Jesus were their branches not broken off and the Gentiles â€œgrafted inâ€ (Romans 9:6-8, 11:11-24) along with a remnant of Jews (Romans 11:5)?

9. Does the New Testament (Ephesians 2:20-22; 1 Peter 2:4-8) not explain that while the physical temple is about to be destroyed, it is being replaced by the church with Christ as the cornerstone and Christians as the living stones?

10. Are there any references in the Bible to the temple being built a third time? If there is going to be a rebuilt Jewish temple in the future, why does Scripture say God does not dwell in temples made with hand anymore (Acts 7:48, 17:24)? Is Christ not the new temple (John 2:19-21; Revelation 21:22)?

11. Do not all the New Testament texts comparing Israel to a fig tree point to Jerusalemâ€™s destruction rather than its restoration (example: Luke 13:6-9)?

12. Could the dispensational distinctive of separation between Israel and the church be incorrect? On the Jewish Day of Pentecost in Acts 2, if you asked Peter and the disciples if they were part of Israel or the Church, what would they say? Would they not say they were both? Donâ€™t Romans 11 and Hebrews 8 show that the gentiles were grafted in as the Israel of God, rather the Jews maintaining a separate line of salvation? Doesnâ€™t Galatians 3:14 further identify the nature of the blessing that would come to all the other nations in addition to Israel through Christ? Do not Galatians 3:6-8 and Galatians 3:29 tell us that believers are the spiritual descendants of Abraham?

13. Does dispensationalism wrongly divide justification by law and grace? (A distinctive among many dispensationalists is that there is separation between Israel and the church, such that there are two paths to salvationâ€”law for Jews and grace for everyone else.) Arenâ€™t both law and grace (gospel) present in both the Old Testament and New Testament? Did Paul in Romans 4, 5 not teach that even the Old Testament saints were saved through faith? Didnâ€™t God preach the gospel beforehand to Abraham (Galatians 3:8)? Does Paul in Galatians 3 not clearly state that no man is justified by the law, and quotes the Old Testament to prove it? Doesnâ€™t Hebrews 10:4 teach that no one was ever saved by animal sacrifices? On the other hand, arenâ€™t there plenty of statements in the New Testament about Christians obeying the law (Matthew 5:19; Matthew 7:16-20; Matthew 13:36-43; Matthew 25:31-46; Romans 3:31; James 2:10-17)?

14. When Jesus says in John 14:6 that no man comes to the Father but through him, doesnâ€™t Jesus mean what he says? â€œNo manâ€ would include Jew or Gentile, does it not?

15. Do you believe that two-thirds of Israelis will be slaughtered in a Holocaust II (book by John Walvoord Israel in Prophecy)? If so, how can you call yourself pro-Israel? When you pray for Jesus to come soon or the imminent rapture, arenâ€™t you preaching or even asking for a near term slaughter of the Jews? Isnâ€™t this teaching based almost entirely on one verseâ€”Zechariah 13:8â€”yet the New Testament places the previous verse (13:7) squarely in the time of Christ? Is it not clear enough that Zechariah 14:2 must refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70? Is it not true that there is no prediction in the book of Revelation about the annihilation of two-thirds of all Jews living in Israel by the Antichrist?

16. If we are in the New Covenant era, which scripture says is forever (Hebrews 13:20), why would God go back to a temple system of the Old Covenant which Paul called bondage (Galatians 4)?

17. If God was going to go back to animal sacrifices for sin in a future millennium, does that mean Christ died in vain (Galatians 2:21)?

18. How can the earthly kingdom of Jesus be set up in earthly Jerusalem, when Jesus himself said the hour was coming when worshipping God would NOT be in Jerusalem (John 4:21)?

1. Dispensationalists say that you interpret the Bible literally, but do you do so appropriately and consistently? For example, when Isaiah (Isaiah 55:12) describes the mountains and the hills breaking into song and the trees clapping their hands, is this to be taken this literally? When Isaiah (Isaiah 13:9-13) describes God shaking the earth from its place and making the stars not show their light (predicting doom on Babylon), was this not intended to be taken seriously but non-literally? Or when God says that he will make the sun go down at noon (Amos 8:8-9), was this literal or rather an emphatic statement about his coming judgment on the northern kingdom of Israel (2 Kings 17:3-6)? When Jesus says that he is the â€œvine,â€ does that mean he is a woody plant?

2. When Colossians 1:23 states, This is the gospel you heard and that has been proclaimed [past tense] to every living creature under heaven. â€” do you interpret this literally? Had the gospel been declared to the American Indians? Well, no, of course not. This passage, and many others that could be given, refers to the spread of the gospel in the first century across the local region of the known world.

3. If prophetic language is literal, why did none of the cosmic events described in Isaiah 13 literally happen when it was fulfilled according to Daniel 5?

4. Does not the Bible throughout use figures of speech such as symbolism, allegory, parables, hyperbole, and so forth to make a pointâ€”but which are not always intended to be interpreted literally?

5. If the Bible is to be interpreted 100% literally, why are the terms like â€œat hand,â€ â€œquickly,â€ â€œshortly,â€ etc. not read literally?

6. If soon means 2000 years or longer, does that mean it was going to take Timothy 2000 years to be sent to the Philippians (or to us) by Paul (Philippians 2:19)?

7. If the Bible is to be interpreted 100% literally, why do some dispensationalists say the seven churches in Asia (Revelation 1-3) are church ages and not literal churches?

8. Can we agree on these four criteria for interpreting the Bible: interpreting it (a) the way it was intended to be interpreted by the author, (2) the way it would have been understood by the original hearers, (c) in context of both the immediate passages and the rest of the Bible (letting Scripture interpret Scripture), (d) interpreting the more difficult passages in light of the clearer ones, (e) in order that all of Scripture is harmonized?

Gary DeMar, author of the book Last Days Madness says this about interpretation of words: If the Bible can be interpreted so soon can mean late, and near can mean distant, and shortly can mean delayed, and vice versa, then the Bible can mean anything and nothing. Does God have two methods of measurement? When God says love are we to read hate? Can we trust a God whose words can mean their opposite?

1. Is there anywhere in the New Testament a trace of evidence for a secret, invisible, instantaneous rapture of the church? Why do dispensationalists say we are: (1) on earthâ€¦ (2) when we die, we go somewhereâ€¦ (3) at the rapture, we go to heavenâ€¦ (4) at the Second Coming we come back to earth seven years later to be there for 1,000 yearsâ€¦ (5) after the 1000 years, we go to a new heaven and earth (or is it heaven itself)?

2. Is not heaven itself the hope of the believer? Is eschatology so confusing that God would have us bounce around between somewhere (hades/temporary abode?), heaven, earth, new heaven and new earth? Would you not want to stay in heaven when you get there?

3. If Jesus is going to rapture the church out of the world, why does Jesus pray for the exact opposite thing to happen (that the church would NOT be taken out of the world) in John 17:15?

5. Doesnâ€™t the Jewish War of 66-70 AD qualify as a great tribulation, given that that over a million Jews were killed, their nation was dissolved, their temple decimated, and along with it went their whole world order and the centerpiece of their religionâ€”the centuries old system of animal sacrifices for sin?

6. If the great tribulation (Daniel 12:1; Matthew 24:21) is global, why did Jesus only tell those living in Judea to flee to the mountains to avoid the tribulation (Matthew 24:16, Luke 21:20-22)? In other words, why would the Great Tribulation be a global event if people could escape it by fleeing to the mountains? If the great tribulation is global, why did Daniel only refer to it occurring to those who were the children of my people?

7. If the Great Tribulation associated with the Second Coming was to be global, why does Jesus compare it to Sodom and Gomorrah which was clearly local (Luke 17:25-32), also Peter (2 Peter 2:5-9)?

8. If the Great Tribulation is future, why did Jesus say it (the great day of judgment) would fall upon his generation (Matthew 12:38-45; 16:1-4; 23:29-39)?

9. Does Daniel not tell us exactly when the time of distress (12:1), the resurrection (12:2), the time of the end (12:9), and the abomination of desolation (12:11)â€”all occur when the power of the holy people has finally been broken (12:7) and the burnt offering taken away (12:11)? Can there be ANY doubt that this was 70 AD?

10. If the rapture is still an event to come in the future, why do the time-frame implications given in 1 and 2 Thessalonians suggest that Paul expected the events of which he speaks in these books to occur while some of those alive at the time were still alive? Go back and re-read these passages with this idea in mind: 1 Thessalonians 1:10, 2:16, 4:17; 2 Thessalonians 1:7, 5:4, 5:8-9.

1. How can the kingdom Jesus established be physical/earthly when Jesus rejected a physical kingdom in John 6:15; John 18:36?

2. How can the kingdom have not yet come, when John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and the apostles all declared the kingdom of God is at hand (Matthew 3:2, 4:17, 10:7; Acts 28:31)?

3. Why would the kingdom be set up in earthly Jerusalem, even though Paul said earthly Jerusalem was bondage and the old covenant (Galatians 4:24-25)?

4. Since Jesus declared that the Kingdom had come when he cast out demons, did He not usher in the kingdom during his time on earth (Matthew 12:28-29; Luke 10:8-20; Luke 11:20)?

5. How can His kingdom be seen by everyone when Jesus himself said it comes NOT with observation (Luke 17:20)?

6. How is it that you find hope in an expected destruction of the planet and its replacement with a utopia in which even carnivorous animals will take up vegetarianism? Is this at all contradictory with your concept of a new temple in Jerusalem where there will be re-instituted animal sacrifices?

7. Why would His kingdom be set up in earthly Jerusalem, knowing Jesus condemned their city several times (Matthew 21-Matthew 25)? 8. How can the millennialâ€ kingdom of God be of the Jews when Jesus himself said that he took the kingdom away from them and gave it to the gentiles who produce the fruits (Matthew 21:43)? If Jesus took the kingdom from the Jews and gave it to the gentiles, why is there no scripture to show another transfer back to the Jews?

9. Has the failure to recognize that we are living in the kingdom of heaven today contributed to the malaise of the church?

10. Does the idea of a future millennial reign of Jesus on earth sound too much like Jehovahâ€™s Witness theology? (Jehovahâ€™s Witnesses got their start with books entitled the Millennial Dawn.)

Russell said: The coming, the judgment, the kingdom, are all coincident and contemporaneous, and not only so, but also nigh at handâ€¦So long as the Theocratic nation existed, and the temple, with its priesthood and sacrifices and ritual, remained, and the Mosaic law continued, or seemed to continue, in force, the distinction between Jew and Gentile could not be obliterated. But the barrier was effectually broken down when law, temple, city, and nation were swept away together, and the Theocracy was visibly brought to a final consummation. That event was, so to speak, the formal and public declaration that God was no longer God of the Jews only, but that He was now the common Father of all menâ€¦

1. If dispensationalists can believe in an invisible, spiritual coming of Christ for the rapture, then why do they condemn preterists for teaching in that very same nature of fulfillment in 70 AD?

2. Is there a single verse that explicitly teaches that the antichrist will make a covenant with the Jews and then break it?

3. Is there a single verse that explicitly teaches that Jesus will reign on earth for a literal thousand years, or that Jesus will sit on the throne of Davidâ€™s in Jerusalem during the millennium?

4. Does the Bible speak of a literal thousand year reign of the saints outside of Revelation 20â€”a chapter that is perhaps the most complex and highly symbolic section of the most symbolic and complex book in the Bible? Is it likely that something so dramatically significant would not appear elsewhere in the Bible?

5. Is there any explicit teaching that animal sacrifices and circumcision will be reinstated during the millennium of Revelation 20?

6. In a literal millennium, are premillennialists relying on faith in total bureaucracy for the world? Doesnâ€™t this view put too much faith in man being able to live sinlessly?

See also: http://www.biblicalpreteristarchive.com/statements/70-Qs.htm (Many of our questions came from this source.)

As Russell put it, writing in the nineteenth century: Is it conceivable that an apostle would mock the suffering and persecuted Christians of his time with dark parables about distant ages?â€¦If it spoke of, as some would have us believe, of Huns and Goths and Saracens, of mediaeval emperors and popes, of the Protestant Reformation and the French Revolution, what possible interest or meaning could it have for the Christian churches of Ephesus, and Smyrna, and Philadelphia, and Laodicea?â€¦It may be safely affirmed that on this hypothesis [Revelation] is incapable of interpretation: it must continue to be what it has so long been, the material for arbitrary and fanciful speculation.â€ Note: In the twenty-first century, such references by prophecy enthusiasts have morphed into Russia, China, Iran, nuclear holocaust, or whatever the news of the day happens to be.

More and more Christians are beginning to ask questions like this in their dispensational churches. The torrent of popular books and claims about biblical prophecy in recent decades, aside from taking up lots of shelf space in Christian book stores, seems to have a peculiar appeal to lay believers who, curiously enough, find hope in an expected destruction of the planet and its replacement with a utopia in which even carnivorous animals will take up vegetarianism. It is simply taken for granted that the Bible predicts and explains an end of time, and that there is no number of elapsed centuries spent waiting for it that cannot be called the end times.

His Heavens declares His Glory.

And the Heavens say we are currently in the age of th Fishers of men and the Bride/Church..

A couple thousand years ago, His Creation declared the age of the Passover Lamb and Atonement..

Those signs keep moving above our heads, in His Sky, and we are nearing the age of when His Spirit is being poured out over all flesh and the coming of the Lion from the tribe of Judah..

Those signs can be seen when Israel was to observe His Feasts.
Spring - His 1st month.
Fall- His 7th month.

Those signs are the old testament and the new testament.. Up there. And we await His coming.

Just need to know when and where to look..

People have lots of questions. His Creation tells us where we are..

Just need to know where and when to look.
And that direction is up, where our Redemption draws near..

Good grief! More sophomoric assumptions about the Harpazo that Preterists refuse to believe in? LOL!

This whole thread deserves the Jesus face-palm picture.

Tell me:

When did THE ENTIRE WORLD look upon the TWO WITNESSES as mentioned in Revelation 11 and celebrate their deaths for 3 and a half days?

Did they have cameras back in 70 AD? And worldwide satellite connections to beam across the ponds?

When did Nero make everybody take the mark WORLDWIDE and HOW? Where were the worldwide beheadings?

How many of you have seen Angels flying (Revelation 14:6) around proclaming the gospel that will finally fulfill Mark 16:15? Did Tacitus write about that? He must have missed that too!

Learn the parable of the Fig Tree (Israel). Mock all you want, but the Rapture will happen (John 14:3; Matthew 24:40-44) and when it does I surmise that about half the Christians taken will be kicking and screaming because they love this world more than Christ.

Modern dispensationalism takes a Biblical concept too far and twists it due to an erroneous understanding of the relationship between Israel and the Church.

The church began entirely Jewish. Later Samaritans and Gentiles of every nationality were added. An early debate was whether Gentile converts had to convert to Judaism as well. The unanimous agreement was that Gentiles could become Christian without becoming Jews.

Today, most Gentile Christians think Judaism was abolished by Christianity. Not so. It was very well established that Jews kept their Jewishness. They were not to abandon Moses and their following of the Law. If anyone disagrees with this, they need to re-read their Bible.

The invisible rapture idea springs from this wrong understanding of the relationship between Jew and Gentile, Law and Grace. No one has ever been saved by Law. Salvation has always been by grace. Today’s dispensation is one of super-abounding grace which extends to the whole world.

There will be a seven-year period in which God completes all of His promises to Israel as a nation, and the entire nation will be saved. At the beginning of this period, Israel will have a temple and offer sacrifices. That does not mean that Israel has been restored to God or is saved. They will put their trust in a false Messiah who will betray them in the middle of this seven-year period. This marks the beginning of the Great Tribulation.

As you pointed out, there is a localization of events in Israel and Jerusalem. After all, the temple must be in Jerusalem. Anti-christ will rule the world from that temple. The Great Tribulation will indeed come upon the whole world though. (See Revelation 3:10.)

You are correct that Christ prayed to “keep them from evil” rather than being removed from the world. God will preserve the elect through the Great Tribulation. The Great Tribulation WILL NOT last for the entire second half of the seven-year period. It will be “cut short” to save the elect. Immediately after the Great Tribulation ends, Christ will VISIBLY return and take out the elect, and God’s wrath will be poured out on those who remain on the earth. After these judgments have been completed, He will return, utterly defeat anti-Christ, bind Satan in the bottomless pit, and establish an earthly kingdom that will initially last a thousand years. Heaven will be on earth.

Entire books have been written on any number of questions you posed. It is not possible to address every one of them simply and succinctly, but I hope this addresses the core issues.

(I wrote this in 2010, in response to many many posts by a preterist Freeper.)

SATURDAY, MARCH 20, 2010

“Preterism doesn’t hold W.A.T.E.R.”
A short while ago, I realized that many people I know are holding to the ideas of preterism.

I wanted to re-read the gospel accounts of the Olivet discourse, since a frequent preterist poster on Freerepublic.com uses a verse to support his claims: “because these are the days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled” Luke 21:22.

I noticed that for preterism to be true, the following five events must have been fulfilled by now. Since they are NOT fulfilled, I find it difficult, if not impossible, to accept preterism.

I propose an acrostic to illustrate these events: W.A.T.E.R.

W = “worldwide total evangelism”, from Matt 24:14

A = “all tribes mourning the Son of Man”, from Matt 24:30

T = “times of the Gentiles fulfilled”, Luke 21:24

E = “elect gathered from the four winds”, Matt 24:31

R = “return of Jesus” - (how could this possibly have happened in 70 AD, as some preterists claim???) - from Matt 24:27.

This post is a brief introduction to this acrostic, as a reminder that “Preterism doesn’t hold W.A.T.E.R.”.

___

P.S. Noted on 1-4-16. If you want to be a preterist and an anti-dispensationalist, and if you want to persist in a Roman Catholic eschatology, then you do it at your peril.

The bible lays out the plan of the Author. It does explain and predict not “an end of time”, but the end of our earth as we know it and the establishment of the new heaven and earth. Your use of the words “peculiar appeal” and “hope in destruction” is, .....(unloving?).

With the many questions you offered, I’ll summarize that God has one plan, revealed to Adam, revealed to Abrahm, (which incorporated in its blessing others, non-future Jews(( meaning you Grumpa[if you are gentile], which I pray is a lighthearted sobriquet), and myself).

In Romans 11:11 the text says (NASB)”I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous.

In Romans 11:18 the Lord says,”do not be arrogant toward the branches ...”

In Romans 11:25, my synopsis, I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will be not wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

verse 26v “and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written”

I trust my Lord to know what He is about.

What is most disturbing is that preterists (and all covenant theologians) ignore the most personal aspect of the Abrahamic covenant ... and they have no answer for it.

Go back into Genesis ... and see that the land was promised to Abraham HIMSELF ... Abraham never entered the promised land ... he died 400+ years before Joshua began the conquest. So it does not matter in any respect how much land the Jews ever possessed in history ... Abraham himself never possessed any part of it ... and thus the complete fulfillment is still future.

This is perfectly consistent with the covenant stipulations and with a future fulfillment in the Messianic kingdom (Dan 7, 9, Rev. 20 ...)

Preterists rarely have a cogent OT biblical theology ... because they are forced to read back the NT into the Old and supplant what is plainly taught there. If God is not trustworthy to keep His promise to Abraham then He is not trustworthy to keep His promise to us. That is what is at stake here ... the trustworthiness of Almighty God.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.