Thank you. While I disagree with your interpretation of Scripture in places, I wholeheartedly agree that even though I may disagree with you in some of the particulars, it is out of a great love and respect for our shared salvation that I still consider you a Brother.
The Marcoin heresy that I reacted to so violently is, bluntly put, a vile, evil twisting of Scripture that no blood-bought Christian could ever tolerate much less agree with. For others to attempt to smear their Brothers with this heresy by linking a disagreement about Eschatology to this...bunk...is beyond the pale, especially given the fact that the core tenant of the Dispensational view is that God, being One, does not change and is the same yesterday, today and forever.
The core tenant of the Marcoin heresy is that YHWH was a false God and that Jesus replaced Him. That’s blatent, bald-faced paganism and I and those other Dispy’s that I know will have no part of it. I, naturally enough, can’t speak for some of the larger names in the Dispy camp as I don’t know them personally, but those who I do know would never hold to this heresy, or even a shade of it, as we were accused of by others.
Now, that being said, you said that Dispensationalism holds some weak spots. While I am not greatly versed in the various schools of thought within the Dispy camp, I am fairly well schooled in the Scriptures as a whole and would like to address some of the areas that you see as a weakness, beginning with the charge that Dispy’s hold to the idea that God is a polygimist (sp?).
I reject this idea in the understanding that the Godhead, consisting of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, is made up of three Persons but only one God.
In the Old Testament (Deut. 6:4), we are told that “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD:” or, literally, that YHWH elohim is YHWH. This provides our first point of reference that the LORD God is One God and not multiple gods.
Furthermore, the Old Testament and the New Testament both lay out the seperate personhoods of each portion of the Trinity. As each portion of the Trinity can have it’s own will, can speak and can love, this proves that each portion shows the hallmarks of personhood. Furthermore, each person in the Trinity has a different function. The Father chooses who will be saved, the Son redeems them and the Spirit seals them. Other proofs can be shown if you wish, but I suspect that you agree, since most who hold to the Reformed viewpoint uphold the Nicene Creed, which is as complete a description of the Trinity as you can find in one place in the early writings.
All that was to say this. If Israel was the wife of the Father, and the Church is the Bride of the Son (Lamb), then why is it polygami to say that two of the three persons of the trinity are wed to different groups of people? I understand that there’s some confusion in regards to historical Israel as opposed to Spiritual Israel, but again I don’t see a problem here, especially if the prophets were correct in stating that all of Israel will be saved. Historical Israel is the wife of the Father, Spiritual Israel (the Church) is the bride of Christ and both are considered the people of God. Where’s the problem?
Does that still mean I’m the anti-Christ?