Too Much Unnecessary Resistance

After last week’s article, “American Vision’s Vision,” I was brought up on charges by “Jim,” a fellow Christian. Here’s a slightly edited account of his criticism:

I’m always saddened when folks cling to the biblically unsupportable, man-made theory of dispensationalism (DP) which is not a synonym for premillennialism; especially given that it’s brought so much provable damage to the Church. DP didn’t exist before 1830, so it couldn’t have been a “fundamental of the faith” before then. Rather, it turned into “faith” that helped foster a pietistic movement here and in Europe that had already gained significant ground by the late ninth century.

Beyond just abetting a Church-enfeebling pietism, DP’s chief effect was to coat the entire twentieth century with cultural pessimistic, “we lose in history and in culture.” This happens via its robotically disavowed but nevertheless underlying operational motive of escapism. The well-known “rapture rescue” is escapism’s exhibit A, and this frank yearning is also evident amid its insistence that the Church— in spite of the Cultural Mandate’s and the Great Commission’s clear victory inferences—only “gains by losing.” That is, per DP theory, the Church “wins” only by being swept off the earth short of victory in culture.

DP has paralyzed, or at a minimum, neutralized the willingness of everyday Christians to push hard for victory before Christ returns. It squelches the desire to defeat humanism whether enemy attacks are launched from inside or outside the churches. No matter how we slice it we’re getting beaten up, and it’s time for the Davids and Gideons out there to mobilize and turn the tide. But DP says, “Don’t do it. It’s against God’s plan. We inevitably lose in history and any countering efforts means you’re defying His will.”

But scholarly research by American Vision and others of allied conviction (which takes my own “personal beliefs” off the table) skillfully exposes the biblically untenable DP of J. N. Darby, Scofield, John MacArthur, Tim LaHaye, Hal Lindsey, Norm Geisler, et al. AV’s facts, refutations, and unassailable conclusions are published in such detail and in such breadth that only stubborn, purposeful refusal could possibly explain why some would choose to see it otherwise.

Jim’s Proverbs 6:19 reference warns against sowing discord among the brethren. But revealing the errors of dispensationalism is, in the final analysis, accord-, not discord-advancing. Mention of 1 Corinthians 8 is off the mark, as well, because Paul’s concern was not for world Christendom, merely about one congregation’s intramural dispute over food, Christian liberty, and the “weaker brother.” When a house, a bedroom, and a brother I love are all burning, the burnee can expect a rude, emergency-based arousal from sleep, probably by a garden hose watering him down while also being pulled roughly out of bed to safety. Spiritually insensitive? Actually, it’s the best thing to do. Paul’s concern then was not, as with DP’s global threat today, at all similar to AV’s unifying, church-preserving, victory-motivating response to the vicious attacks from ravenous wolves outside church walls…walls currently weakened and tottering thanks to a bad theory.

Since the above explanation is old news to many AV readers, some might ask why I would bother to review it again. It’s just as an extra reminder to many that the good news of the Gospel is much more than the knowledge that a person can acquire “fire and life insurance” in advance of their journey to the other side. Nearly equally glad tidings is that those who will can help bequeath to Christians alive and as yet unborn an obedience-based action plan for daily living in these turbulent times that is exciting, fulfilling, depression-defeating, victory-in-culture-guaranteeing and God-honoring. Yes, obedience to God is our top priority in all things, but a daily reason to arise from slumber, to go out and make a difference for Him in visible, measurable ways is something that changes lives. DP undermines the potential existence of this life-enhancing alternative no matter how solemn the DP protests saying “we pray for Him to come today but act as though it won’t be for a thousand years.” So far, this inspiring phrase is more act than actual.

Another plus from Jim’s letter is the opportunity it offers to share a handy acronym. I “discovered” it while studying AV material. When chatting with a friend on whom DP may be exerting undue influence, it’ll help to think of the “TRAILS” memory device. It refers to six of the key pillar fundamentals of DP. These end times pillars are so vital that the New Testament should literally be bursting with references to them. Yet, they’re not there as pertaining to DP theory. Try as you might, you won’t find them. They are:

With dispensationalism the theory came first followed by snippets of verses cut out from here and there to validate it. Next time you read through the entire New Testament keep “TRAILS” in mind. It’s worth your time.
I thank Jim for writing and for his gracious close. My somewhat hard-nosed remarks may not sound as kind, but they are surely meant to be kindly as I hope the burning building analogy proves.

I can see that you know how to spell words that I do not even know the meaning of, but i assume that you believe that there is no return of christ until after the thousand year reign, is that right?

The bible states in several versus,s ( Christ will return at the last day. I have not seen any place where it says he will return before that.

As far as the rapture is concerned I believe the verse in 1 cor 15 v 51 and 52 is misunderstood by so many people, we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump.

It doe,s not say that every one will not die, it just says they will not sleep in death, but will be resurected at once
when they die. during the time of the last day how ever long the last day is? ( I do not believe in the rapture theory )

What every one needs to do is to read all of ch 15 and the verse,s that lead up to verse,s 51 and 52 also it explains that the first resurection occured when Christ rose,
those people that went with christ had been sleeping for years or hunderds of years.

verse 12 now if christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there be no resurrection of the dead? ( in other words they were saying there was no resurrection except for chirst)

Verse 13 but if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen. ( then christ could not have been risen either )

verse 23 But every man in his own order, Christ the firstfruits, afterward they that are Christ,s at his coming. ( The firstfruits went with christ, we are waiting for his coming. ) I( if we are waiting for his coming at the last day, then when could the firstfruits have gone except to go with Christ?

The firstfruits are the 144000 and they went with Christ.

the rest of the believers will be resurrected at the time of thier death after the last day starts, the last day could be a thousand years, or one day and it will be after or along with the tribulation. this is something I struggle with.

St matthew ch 27 v 52 and 53 And the graves were opened and many bodies of the saints which slept arose and came out of the graves and went into the holy city and appeared unto many. ( this was obviously done for a sign to the people )

Guestion, was these people killed again and put back into thier graves or did they go with Christ as the 144000?

I believe they went with Christ as the firstfruits.

Paul explains in romans ch 8 v 29 and 30
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called and whom he called, them he also justified, and whom he justified , them he also glorified. this is all past tense, it already happened. ( why would he have prepared them if they were not to go with Christ as the firstfruits? )

St John ch 12 verse 23 The hour is come, that the son of man should be glorified, he is speaking of his death and resurrection, resurrection is to be glorified. so the people paul is speaking of has to already be resurrected.

I am not trying to act like a know it all because I am not, and i realize there could be some mistakes in my thinking but its the way i see it although it would be impossible for me to put it all down to where any one could understand it very good.
would like to hear your view.

Thanks for the comeback

I do not blame you for having to have proof from the Scriptures,
But I notice you did not mention Romans ch 8 verse29 and 30
about the glorification of some people in the past.
or 1 cor 15 v 23. the first fruits,

You seem to be saying the same thing as the people in 1 cor ch 15 did, that there is no resurection of the dead, if there were no resurection of the dead then Christ could not have risen either, because he was to lead the firstfruits.

cor ch 15 verse 20
But now is Christ risen from the dead, [and] become the firstfruits of them that slept.( they were no longer sleeping when this verse was wrote by paul.)

The new verisions of the scriptures changes the word slept to sleeping, many people are like the people who paul was writing to,

They do not want to believe that the people who were the ancesters of these terible jews could have been the firstfruits of christ. so they just changed the word slept to sleeping, so to change the whole concept.

So it is likly these new verisions came from these very people.

Hosea ch 6 v 2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
(by this verse you can see that they were expecting to go with him at his resurection.)

If you read rev ch 14 v 1 through 5 you will see that it fits right in with 1 cor ch 15 v 23 the firstfruits

it plainly shows that the 144000 are the firstfruits that went with Christ.

and yes, you are right about the ones who came up from thier grave when Jesus died, it doe,s not say they went with Christ, but doe,s it have to? What else could it have happened for?

When you say there is nothing which indicates that anyone else went with Christ, maby you have not paid too much attention to the scriptures I have pointed out, plus many more.

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.