Got a cite for that?
You're entitled to your beliefs, but here's the way I would word it: "Anyone who harms God's people (His Church) will regret it.". (The New Testament people of God [the regenerate] include both Jews and Gentiles).
Jerry Falwell sent out this message on March 28, 2002: “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: May they prosper who love you” (Psalm 121:6).
Not that we shouldn't pray for Isreal, we should, but Falwell has *a specific reason* for why he wants people to pray for Isreal *specifically*. He subscribes to one of the flavors of a newly concocted (1830) biblical interpretation by John Nelson Darby (The Plymouth Brethren sect) known as "dispensationalism".
In other words, he doesn't believe (with the historic Christian church) that what Jerusalem was for the Isrealites (Old testament), --- THE CHURCH is to the believer (New Testament).
This was posted last year by another FReeper, and in case you missed it, and are interested, here it is again:
"While the pre-tribulational, pre-millennial dispensationalist scheme has certaily caught in American Christianity, vis. Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye's popularizing (Late Great Planet Earth; Left Behind serial offerings), and within the 20th century promoted on a more scholarly basis by Lewis Chafer and Dallas Seminary and others, who in turn took it from C.I. Scofield and his Scofield Study Bible, it is a novel view of eschatology. A novel view that is having less and less support among even some dispensationalists...
It is not based upon historic Reformational theology in any sense, and is completely at odds with covenantal Reformed theology. Point of fact, it was *never* taught, believed, or even hinted at, by anyone in the historic Christian faith.
John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren (circa A.D. 1830s) literally invented it, though others in the Plymouth Brethren sect certainly contributed to its formulation (e.g., A.N. Groves; B.W. Newton; W.H. Dorman; E. Cronin; and J.G. Bullett). Some dispensationalists chafe at this, but the fact is dispensationalism is a direct product of the Plymouth Brethren movement in England in the early 19th century. It isn't found in the New Testament; it isn't found in the Church fathers; it isn't found in the universal creeds of the historic Church; it isn't found in Augustine; it isn't found in any of the great Reformation creeds and statements of faith; it isn't found in Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Knox, Spurgeon, Dabney, Machen, well, I hope the reader gets the point.
I am not saying it was a minority view, or a hated view, or even considered a heretical view--it simply didn't exist until J.N Darby concocted it in the 1830s.
It didn't exist in any form in the United States until circa 1864; Darby graced the United States with his presence.
Darby so impressed Dr. James Brooks of the 16th and Walnut Avenue Presbyterian Church in St. Louis that Dr. Brooks is considered the "father of American dispensationalism."
One of Dr. Brooks' students was named C.I. Scofield. So, essentially, the historical beginnings may be rightly traced, literally, from JN Darby, to James Brooks, to C.I. Scofield, to Lewis Chafer and subsequently being churned out at Dallas Seminary, founded by Dr. Chafer.
What made it "take off," so to speak? During this circa of history, the American denominations were being heavily corrupted by liberalism, in the wake of Chuck Darwin's philosophical piece, Origins of Species (Darwin wasn't a scientist, but a failed divinity student--his Origins is one of the books that everyone talks about but never reads...it is not a work of science, but is simply the [largely borrowed...] musings of Darwin), and the cultural impact it had.
By 1923, liberalism and historic Christian teaching came to a real confrontation at Princeton Seminary (at one time one of the great defenders of the historic Christian faith). The General Assembly in 1923 resulted in J. Gresham Machen and other scholars from Princeton breaking from the school and forming Westminster Theological Seminary, September 25, 1929. A truly great educational institution.
The Reformed scholars of the school defended historic Christian teaching against the anti-christian liberalism that was taking over much of the American church. The works they published defended the fundamentals of the faith, such as the inspiration of Scripture, the Virgin birth of Christ, the bodily Resurrection, the divinity of Christ and the substitutionary atonement of Christ. Those that held to historic Christian teaching were then labeled "fundamentalists"...
******(it should be carefully noted that these "fundamentalists" should not be equated with or confused with the current dispensationalist fundamentalists, as they are strikingly different, whereas the so-called present-day fundamentalist is typified as being anti-intellectual, anti-historic, anti-creedal, which the great men that fought the liberals in the early 20th century were certainly not any of the above).******
The liberalism of the day made such headway into the mainline denominations that they essentially ceased being Christian when an honest analysis is made of their doctrinal and creedal content; in our day, none of the mainline denominations may be rightly called Christian from a historic, New Testament perspective.
In this horrific state of affairs, came the Scofield Study Bible and the energetic preaching of C.I. Scofield. In response to the major denominations in the U.S. being corrupted by liberalism, the independent church movement began, and with noble purposes to be sure.
Essentially all of the leaders of the early independent church movement were dispensationalists, and the defacto Bible that was used was the Scofield Study Bible.
Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer founded Dallas Seminary in 1924, and while the mainline demonominations were jettisoning the Christian faith, this dispensationalist school was upholding historic doctrines such as the inspiration of Scripture, the deity of Christ, His miracles, the bodily Resurrection, et. al.
The person in the pew didn't want to hear that the Bible was "wrong," and that Jesus--if He ever existed--was just a nice man, deluded, but just a nice man, that miracles are "impossible," and that they were not only not in the image of God, they were simply a quirk, a biological oddity, a product of time and chance--in short, animals, of no more worth or real significance than a dog, or cow, or rat, or slug. In that worldview, Mother Teresa and Adolf Hitler are ultimately the same, as ethics and morals are nothing but the subjective illusion of evolved animals, with the same reward--if anything, Hitler acted more "rationally consistent" with the modern worldview, as he fully believed in evolution and the survival of the fittest. But that is another story, with the present state of American government and public education as monuments to the nihilistic, relativistic worldview they are based upon (that includes both parties, folks--the Republican party is different in degree, not kind, from the Democratic party).
Dallas Seminary filled the void that was left by the abandoning of the Christian faith by the mainline denominations (and as a side note, the cults took advantage of this as their rise took place during the same time period)--Dallas Seminary produced scores of graduates, and these men planted churches all over the United States, Bible-believing churches, and those sickened by the liberalism of the mainline churches flocked to the new dispensational fundamental churches. These churches did preach the Gospel and defend the faith, to their credit.
And here we are today...most conservative churches today are dispensationalist in orientation, and most church goers think it is *the* historic, Bible-believing view of eschatology and hermeneutics, _____which it simply is not_____.
Anyway, that is the historic background to dispensationalism and the Hal Lindsey brand "mark of the best" and the "Left Behind" series. "The Beast" of Revelation was most likely Caesar Nero. "Apocalypse Then" essentially.
Is there going to be another physical Temple rebuilt in Jerusalem? The New Testament clearly states that believers in Christ are the Temple of God; the final view of the physical (carnal) Temple of the Old Covenant nation of the Jews was foretold by Christ to be destroyed; it was, circa A.D. 70.
The kingdom was to be taken from the Jews and given to others; it was, and now the covenant people of God are those that have their faith in Jesus Christ, whether ethnically Jewish or Gentile. National Israel rejected her covenant with God, rejected her Messiah, and ultimately rejected God Himself. There is no special significance to the modern secular state of "Israel," which is [a] utterly contemptous of Christ; [b] is overwhelming atheistic in belief; [c] ethnically, they are German, Polish, English, Romanian, Russian, Turkish, Kazaharian, etc....but biological, lineal descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Biologically doubtful, theological irrelevant as regards New Testament belief.
"The mark of the beast is a counterfeit for the seal of God's name on the saints (7:2-8; 14:1; Ezek, 9). The beast owns those who are marked, and they are his slaves. Speculations about a visible mark miss the main point of the spiritual distinction between the two groups" (New Geneva Study Bible study notes for Rev. 13:16 Thomas Nelson, 1995), p. 2023.
Recommended Sites: HERE and HERE
Also Recommended: Understanding Dispensationalism, by Vern S. Poythress (Zondervan Publishing House).
Origional post HERE: #82 posted on 11/17/01 5:15 PM Pacific by EthanNorth