As an outsider looking in -- question: why do guys on both sides of the divide persist in using the terms "dispensationalist" or "replacementarian"? From what I've read, if one takes the strict definition of the terms, hardly anyone fits them exactly.
"Dispensational" is their own term for themselves. It goes back quite a ways, at least to Clarance Larkin and the Scofield Reference Bible. Google it, go to Wikipedia.
"Replacement Theology" is their pejorative term for those that don't hold to the dispensationaists own unique views of the church and it's relation to Israel. The term has no meaning, outside their circles, and no one outside their circles talks that way.
"Replacementarian" is term coined by a Freerepublic dispensationalist*. Same old hooey, different day.
Instead of a serious debate, this can be reduced to poster's hurling "d.." or "rep..." aNot a lot of headway seems to be made.
*whom I will not ping. No good is likely to come of it.
ok, thanks. I’m staying out of this, but I hope that we freepers can debate on this instead of fight.
“Dispensational” refers to the Bible term/word “oikonomos”-economy (literally). It’s a VERY Biblical word.
The fulcrum of dispensationalism is the distinction between Israel and the Church.
Israel = the unfaithful, whoring, divorced wife of God the Father. She will be restored to full status in the future.
The church = the unmarried, betrothed, Bride of Christ. The marriage has yet to take place.